delete_workspace_entity

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

The destructiveHint annotation is consistent with the word 'Delete'. The description adds value beyond the annotation by disclosing the publishing side-effect and the private/DAO-proposal modes, which are not otherwise visible.

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 efficient sentence that front-loads the primary action and then states the publication behavior. No wasted words.

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 6 parameters, no output schema, and no parameter descriptions, the one-sentence description is insufficient. It does not clarify when private vs. DAO-proposal publishing applies, which parameters are conditionally required, or what constitutes a successful deletion/proposal.

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 0% schema description coverage across 6 parameters, the description needed to compensate but only hints at visibility/DAO behavior. It does not explain entityId, kind, daoSpaceId, votingMode, or daoSpaceAddress, leaving agents to guess at conditional requirements.

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 states a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('workspace entity') and adds the key outcome: publishing the change privately or as a DAO proposal. This clearly distinguishes it from simpler sibling tools like delete_entity.

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 the tool is for deletions that also need publication, but it never explicitly contrasts with alternatives such as delete_entity, publish_edit, or propose_dao_edit. The usage context is inferable, not stated.

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