moodle_delete_forum_post

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, but the description adds crucial behavioral details: no recycle bin (permanent deletion), deleting first post deletes the whole discussion, and the editing window with explicit error behavior. This goes well beyond the annotations and fully discloses consequences and failure modes.

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 two sentences, highly scannable with bold warnings. Every clause carries essential information: what is deleted, permanence, cascade deletion of first posts, and time restrictions. No filler or redundancy.

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 destructive nature of the tool and the absence of an output schema, the description covers all critical aspects: action, scope, side effects, constraints, and error behavior. An agent can fully assess the impact before invoking the tool, making it contextually 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 schema has 100% coverage: the postid parameter is described as 'the post id to delete, obtained from moodle_get_discussion_posts.' The tool description itself does not add parameter-specific detail, but the schema already provides sufficient semantics, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 the verb and resource: deleting one's own Moodle forum post or reply. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying self-only scope and the special consequence of deleting a first post (deletes entire discussion), leaving no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 provides clear context on when to use it (for deleting your own posts/replies) and explicit constraints: only within the editing window (usually 30 minutes), and deletion is permanent. However, it does not name alternative tools (e.g., moodle_post_forum_discussion) for non-delete actions, so it lacks explicit when-not guidance, but the context is sufficiently clear.

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