delete_publication

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

The description discloses irreversibility and the cascading deletion of chapters and blobs. Without annotations, it effectively communicates the destructive nature. It does not cover authorization or rate limits, but the core behavior is transparent.

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 consists of two compact sentences with no redundant words. Critical information about cascading deletion, irreversibility, and confirmation requirement is front-loaded.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown) and the straightforward nature of a deletion operation, the description provides all necessary context: what is deleted, the irreversible action, and the required confirmation flag.

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 coverage is 0%, and the description adds meaning for the 'confirm' parameter by specifying it must be true. However, the 'publication_id' parameter is not described; the schema does not document it either, so the description only partially compensates.

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 specifies the verb 'Delete' and the resource 'publication', and explicitly states that it recursively deletes all chapters and blobs owned by the publication, distinguishing it from sibling tools like delete_chapter.

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 explains the required parameter confirm=True and that any other value is refused. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like delete_chapter, though the implication is clear.

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