language_delete

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true, but the description adds critical behavioral details: irreversibility, unbinding associated content, and the force parameter requirement. This goes beyond annotations to fully inform the agent.

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 succinct sentences that front-load the main action and progressively add critical warnings. No wasted words; every sentence contributes to understanding.

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 no output schema, the description could mention the response or success behavior. However, it sufficiently covers deletion behavior, irreversibility, and prerequisites. It is complete for a destructive tool.

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 provides descriptions for language_id and force, covering 67% of parameters. The description emphasizes force's role but does not add new meaning for site or language_id. It reinforces the critical parameter adequately.

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 tool removes a language from the site, including the HTTP method and path. It distinguishes from sibling tools like language_create and languages_list, providing a specific verb-resource pair.

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?

Explicitly states the action is irreversible, requires force=true to execute, and recommends running site_snapshot first if uncertain. This provides clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance, including a safeguard alternative.

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