Delete a wiki page

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context by disclosing the side-effect/return signal: it reports pages whose links to the deleted page are now broken. It could say more about permanence or authorization requirements, but adds real value beyond 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 core action and constraint, followed by a concrete example. No wasted text.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description compensates by explaining the return information (broken-link report). It is largely complete for a destructive mutation tool, though it does not explicitly state irreversibility or permission requirements beyond destructiveHint.

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 the schema already documents all three parameters (title, reason, sandbox_id). The description adds only an example call, which illustrates usage but does not add semantic meaning beyond the schema.

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+resource ('Delete a wiki page') and immediately scopes it against a plausible confusion with raw sources ('never a raw source'). This distinguishes it clearly from siblings like wiki_edit_page and wiki_create_page.

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?

Provides a clear when-not constraint ('never a raw source') but does not name an alternative tool for that case or describe when deletion is preferred over editing/blanking. Still gives enough context to choose the tool correctly in most cases.

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