article_delete_data

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true. The description adds valuable context: irreversible deletion, need for force=true, and client-side rejection of internal_ keys. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource. No unnecessary information. Every sentence adds value.

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 and annotations, the description covers irreversibility, force requirement, and key restrictions. It lacks explanation of error handling for missing keys, but overall sufficient for agent decision-making.

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 coverage is low (25%), but the description explains the force parameter semantics (must be true, default false). It does not elaborate on site, article_id, or key, leaving some ambiguity for the agent. The types are in the schema, so baseline is 3.

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 it deletes a single article.data.<key> and provides the HTTP endpoint. It is specific about the resource (article data key) and distinguishes from siblings like article_delete (which deletes whole article) and page_delete_data.

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 implicitly guides usage by stating it is irreversible and requires force=true. It also warns about internal_ keys. However, it does not explicitly compare with alternatives like article_delete or page_delete_data, but the context of deleting a specific key is clear.

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