Delete Facebook Page Post

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

Annotations already label this as destructive (destructiveHint=true), and the description adds that the action is permanent and irreversible, which exceeds the annotation coverage without contradicting it.

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 highly concise: the core action and irreversibility warning are in the first sentence, followed by a minimal Args list. No redundancy or filler.

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 simple delete operation with full schema coverage and annotations, the description provides the necessary permanence warning and parameter format. Authentication is handled via page_id as clarified in the schema, so nothing critical 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?

The schema descriptions cover both parameters well (100% coverage). The description adds the specific format for post_id ({page_id}_{post_id}), which is not present in the schema, and reiterates page_id's role for authentication.

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 clearly states the action ('Deletes a post from a Facebook Page') and the specific resource, distinguishing it from create/update tools. The permanence warning reinforces its unique destructive purpose.

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?

The description does not explicitly compare with alternatives like meta_update_post or meta_create_post, nor does it state conditions for when to use deletion. It implies usage by naming the action but lacks explicit routing away from siblings.

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