delete_gaps

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the transparent part is largely covered. The description adds the admin-permission requirement, which is genuinely useful context beyond the annotations, but it omits the 100-id bulk cap and the confirm flag's role in this destructive flow.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no waste, but it is arguably too terse for a destructive bulk operation where the confirm/bulk semantics are non-obvious.

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 destructive, admin-gated bulk delete with no output schema, the description is thin: it omits the bulk cap, the confirm requirement, and what happens on partial failure. Annotations cover safety, but the operational context an agent needs before calling is largely absent.

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 description coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented in the schema. The description's "by ids" adds little beyond what gapIds conveys and says nothing about the confirm parameter or the maxItems limit; baseline 3 applies when the schema does the lifting.

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?

States a specific verb ("Delete") and resource ("absences"), and notes the input is by ids. However it uses "absences" while the tool is named delete_gaps and siblings are find_gaps/create_gaps, so the terminology doesn't line up cleanly with the rest of the set, and no sibling is explicitly distinguished.

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 parenthetical "(admin)" hints at a permission requirement, but there is no explicit when-to-use vs when-not, no mention of find_gaps as the read counterpart, and no note that this is bulk/destructive. Usage is only implied.

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