pingen_delete_letter

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It labels the action as 'DESTRUCTIVE', notes irreversibility with 'for good', and explains the confirm:true requirement. It does not mention permissions or error handling, but for a simple delete operation, this is strong transparency.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. The 'DESTRUCTIVE' warning is immediately visible, and every clause adds essential information.

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 2-parameter delete tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the destructive nature, the required confirmation, and the alternative tool for canceling in-transit letters. This is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies the confirm parameter by stating 'Requires confirm:true', and implies letter_id refers to the draft/not-yet-sent letter being deleted. However, it does not detail letter_id format or where to find it, which would add further value.

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's function: 'delete a draft / not-yet-sent letter for good.' It uses a specific verb (delete) with a specific resource (draft/not-yet-sent letter) and distinguishes itself from the sibling pingen_cancel_letter by noting the alternative use case.

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 explicitly provides usage context: use for drafts/not-yet-sent letters, and explicitly names the alternative pingen_cancel_letter for letters already in transit. This gives clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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