Delete a page

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, but the description adds meaningful context beyond that: Wiki.js has no trash, deletion cannot be undone, page history is included, and a confirmation token is required. This gives the agent a realistic sense of the consequences before invoking the destructive operation.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three short sentences, each earning its place: what is deleted, why it is irreversible, and what is required. The most important safety information is front-loaded in the first sentence.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers everything an agent needs to decide and execute correctly: the scope of deletion, permanence, irreversibility, and the confirmation-token requirement. Parameter details are fully covered by the schema, so nothing necessary is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the input schema already documents all four parameters in detail. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Deletes a page and its history.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling delete tools like delete_comment, delete_user, and delete_tag. The inclusion of 'and its history' also differentiates it from purge_page_history, which only removes history.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Provides clear context for when to use the tool: to permanently delete a page and all of its history. It also communicates a key usage requirement, the confirmation token, and the irreversible nature of the operation. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, so it stops short of a 5.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.