delete_question

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

Annotations already mark the tool destructive, so the description doesn't need to restate that. It adds valuable behavior beyond the annotation by stating that deleting the last element is permitted and that a form can end up as an empty shell. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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 with no filler. The main purpose is front-loaded, and the important boundary behavior about deleting the last item is separated cleanly. Every sentence 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 simple two-parameter destructive tool with an output schema and destructiveHint annotation, the description provides all essential calling context: what gets deleted, how it is identified, and the notable edge case. There are no major gaps that would prevent correct invocation.

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 already documents both parameters at 100% coverage with clear descriptions. The description adds extra meaning by revealing that 'code' may refer to either a question or a page break (Breaker), which broadens the interpretation of the schema's 'question' term.

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 a specific action ('Delete'), a precise resource ('a single question or a page break (Breaker) from a form'), and the identifier used ('by code'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_form, which deletes the entire form. There is no ambiguity about what this tool operates on.

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: it is for removing an individual question/breaker from a form, not the whole form. It also clarifies an important edge case—deleting the last item is allowed—so an agent knows not to avoid calling it for fear of invalidating a form. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives like delete_form or update_question.

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