Delete Chat Message

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

The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond the annotations: it explains the soft-delete effect (message marked as deleted but visible as placeholder) and the permission restriction, aligning with destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false.

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 concise—two sentences—front-loaded with the core action and key constraints, with no redundancy.

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?

The description covers the action, permission, and visible outcome, which is sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly. Minor gaps like error handling or return value are not mentioned, but given the simplicity and schema coverage, it is adequately complete.

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 provides descriptions for all three parameters (chatId, messageId, tenantId) at 100% coverage. The tool description adds no extra parameter-specific guidance, so it relies on 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?

The description clearly states the action as a 'soft delete' of a chat message, distinguishing it from hard deletes and from sibling tools like delete_channel_message. The verb and resource are explicit.

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 specifies a clear usage constraint: only the message sender can delete their own messages. This helps the agent decide when to use the tool, though it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like delete_channel_message.

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