delete-module-item

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

The destructiveHint annotation already communicates the destructive nature, and the description does not contradict it. However, the description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotation—no mention of permanence, cascading effects, or permission requirements. It adds minimal value beyond the annotation.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that directly states the action and resources. Every word contributes value, with no extraneous content.

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 simplicity of the delete operation, the fully described schema, and the destructiveHint annotation, the description is sufficient. It does not elaborate on return values or edge cases, but for a straightforward CRUD tool with complete structured metadata, it is adequately complete.

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 provides complete descriptions for all three parameters (courseId, moduleId, itemId), achieving 100% coverage. The tool description itself does not add any parameter-specific meaning, so it remains at the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 uses the specific verb 'Remove' with a clear resource ('item') and context ('from a module'). This distinguishes it from siblings like get-module-item, create-module-item, and update-module-item, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 implies usage (delete an item from a module) but provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it mention alternatives such as delete-module for deleting an entire module. Context is clear but exclusions and alternatives are absent.

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