Delete Meta Pixel

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

The description is consistent with the annotations (destructiveHint: true) and does not contradict them. However, it adds no additional behavioral context beyond the annotation, such as permanence, cascading effects, or error behavior. With annotations already covering the destructive nature, the description provides minimal added value.

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?

The description is extremely concise, consisting of a single purpose sentence and a parameter line. It is front-loaded with the action and avoids any fluff. Every word is purposeful, making it an model of efficiency for a simple tool.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description covers the basic essentials but lacks context such as irreversibility (already implied by destructiveHint) or what happens on success/failure. It does not mention any prerequisites like access permissions or ownership. For a delete operation, this is a minor gap but not critical.

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?

The input schema has zero description coverage, so the description's line 'pixel_id (string): Pixel ID to delete' adds essential meaning by clarifying the purpose of the parameter. Though brief, it effectively explains that the pixel_id identifies the pixel to be deleted, which the schema alone does not convey.

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?

The description states the exact action (deletes) and the specific resource (Meta Pixel). It is a clear, specific verb+resource statement that distinguishes from siblings like meta_delete_post or meta_delete_ad, since the resource is unambiguous.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, irreversibility, or any context about when deletion is appropriate. The description lacks any when-to-use or exclusion criteria, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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