delete_queue_macro

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds nothing beyond that — it doesn't state that deletion is irreversible, whether a confirmation step is enforced, or what permissions are required, despite the schema exposing a `confirm` flag that hints at a safety gate.

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 single short sentence is technically brief, but it is under-specified rather than concise — it consumes a sentence without conveying any information beyond the tool name.

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 mutation with two required but undocumented parameters, no output schema, and no annotation-adjacent detail in the text, the description is completely inadequate. An agent knows only what the name already told it.

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 only 33% (only `confirm` is documented), and the description supplies no meaning for queueId or macroId at all. With two undocumented required parameters and a low coverage rate, the description was obligated to compensate and does not.

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 restates the tool name almost verbatim ('Delete a queue macro'), naming a verb and resource but adding nothing an agent couldn't infer from the identifier. It does not differentiate it from sibling CRUD tools like get_queue_macro, create_queue_macro, or update_queue_macro.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool, no prerequisites, and no mention of the related deletion tools (delete_queue, delete_queue_tag) that an agent must choose between. The text offers zero usage context.

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