delete_contributor_network_comment

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the action as 'soft-delete' and authorization rules. However, it omits details like reversibility, visibility of deleted comments, or side effects.

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 three concise sentences: action, scope, and authorization. No redundant information.

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 simplicity (2 params, output schema exists), the description is adequate but incomplete. It lacks details on idempotency, error conditions, and whether the comment is hidden or recoverable.

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 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It only implies that item_id and comment_id identify the comment, which is already obvious from names. No additional meaning is provided.

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 'Soft-delete a comment' which is a specific verb-resource pair. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_contributor_network_comment and list_contributor_network_comments.

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 specifies the scope ('contributor-network.write') and who can delete ('own comments' or 'item authors on own items'), providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly compare with alternatives or state when not to use.

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