delete_comment

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

The description redundantly states 'destructive' which is already declared by the destructiveHint annotation. No behavioral details are added, such as irreversibility, cascading effects on replies, or authentication requirements. The description fails to provide 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 extremely concise — two short sentences that convey the core action and its destructive nature. No unnecessary words or fluff.

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 delete operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description is adequate but could mention that deletion is permanent or that it removes replies. It does not explain error cases or success indicators. It is minimally 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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the description adds no extra meaning to the single parameter (comment_id). The schema already describes it as 'The ID of the comment to delete', so the description is sufficient but not enhanced.

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 'Delete', the resource 'a comment', and the platform 'Productive.io'. It effectively distinguishes this tool from sibling comment tools like add_comment_reaction, update_comment, and list_comments.

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 lacks guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as prerequisites (e.g., comment ownership) or when not to use (e.g., if the comment is referenced elsewhere). The only context is the destructive hint from annotations, but the description itself provides no explicit usage context.

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