Delete a collection

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It clearly discloses that the collection and its id are permanently gone, that recreating it yields a new id, that games are unaffected, and that Steam backs up collection files. This is strong, safety-critical 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 front-loaded with the operation and packs warnings plus the safe invocation sequence into three short sentences. Every clause adds essential information; there is no filler.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, it covers consequences, backup behavior, and the dry_run/confirm workflow well. The main gap is that it never explicitly says the collection must be identified via id or name, which is notable because confirm is the only required property in the schema.

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 schema already documents all four parameters, providing a solid baseline. The description adds meaningful context about id lifetime—deleted collection ids are not reused—which goes beyond the schema, and it reinforces the roles of confirm and dry_run.

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 opens with a specific verb and object, 'Delete a collection', and immediately distinguishes this from sibling membership tools by noting the games themselves are untouched. There is no ambiguity about the resource acted on.

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?

It gives explicit safety steps: set confirm=true and run dry_run=true first to preview what will happen. It doesn't explicitly compare against alternatives like steam_collection_remove_games, but the deletion use case is clear from the context.

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