Delete Document Permanently

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotations: it doesn't state that deletion is permanent/irreversible, what associated data (notes, history, metadata) is affected, or any authorization requirements. The destructiveHint and idempotentHint annotations already carry the safety information, and the description contributes nothing extra.

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 short, but brevity here is under-specification rather than conciseness: the single sentence merely repeats the verb and object already present in the tool name and title. It doesn't earn its place by adding any new 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?

For a destructive operation, the description omits key context such as permanence, cascading effects, and when deletion is appropriate. Although annotations and the presence of an output schema fill in some details, the description alone leaves an agent under-informed about the consequences and preconditions of calling this tool.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description was responsible for explaining document_id, but it doesn't mention the parameter at all. The schema only shows an integer ID; no guidance is given on how to obtain it, what values are valid, or what the ID refers to, so the description adds no semantic value beyond the schema.

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 'Delete a document.' merely restates the tool name and title without adding specificity. It does not mention 'permanently' from the title, and it doesn't distinguish this deletion from sibling actions like delete_document_type or delete_document_note except through the bare resource noun.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as update_document, bulk_edit_documents, or the sibling deletion tools. The description gives no conditions, prerequisites, or warnings, leaving the agent to guess the appropriate context.

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