delete_messages

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

With no annotations, the description partially carries the behavioral burden by explaining that revoke=True deletes for everyone. However, it does not disclose irreversibility, permission requirements, self-only deletion for revoke=False, or potential failure conditions.

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 one focused sentence that front-loads the core action and adds the most important qualifier. 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?

For a destructive multi-parameter operation with no annotations, the description is incomplete. It lacks usage guidance, side effects, permission requirements, and enough parameter detail for the agent to invoke it correctly without additional inference.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It only clarifies the revoke parameter; chat and message_ids receive no semantic explanation beyond their names and types, and the behavior of revoke=False is only implied.

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 operation and resource: 'Delete messages' and explains the revoke qualifier. It is unambiguous, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling message-mutation tools.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use delete_messages versus alternatives such as edit_message, pin_message, or leave_chat, nor are prerequisites, exclusions, or limitations mentioned. The agent must infer usage solely from the tool name.

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