Delete a block

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds the irreversibility note, which complements annotations. No contradictions. It doesn't detail what else is destroyed (e.g., child records) but provides useful context beyond structured fields.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action, no filler. Every word earns its place.

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 low complexity (1 param, no output schema, annotations present), the description covers the purpose and key behavioral trait (irreversibility). It omits return value, but that is acceptable for a deletion tool without output schema.

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 single parameter block_id has full schema description coverage (100%). The description says 'by UUID' but doesn't add meaning beyond the schema's 'Block UUID to delete.' Thus, no additional value, baseline 3.

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 title and description clearly state 'Delete a block by UUID,' using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like create_block, get_block, update_block, etc., which perform other operations.

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 warns 'This cannot be undone from this server,' implying cautious use. While it doesn't explicitly compare to alternatives like update_block for disabling, the context makes it clear when to use this tool for permanent deletion.

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