delete_dm

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

No annotations are provided, so description carries full behavioral burden. It discloses that the tool deletes a private message and cautions about anti-spam consequences. However, it does not describe idempotency, error handling, or success/failure responses, which would improve 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 concise with two core sentences and a brief Args line. It is front-loaded with the action and provides necessary warnings without extraneous information.

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?

Given the simple operation (single parameter, no nested objects, output schema exists), the description sufficiently informs the agent about the tool's use and risks. A minor gap is the lack of return value details, but the output schema likely covers that.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning by explaining the parameter 'message_id: The message ID to delete' in the Args section, clarifying what the identifier refers to, compensating for the bare 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 'Delete a direct message by ID,' specifying the action (delete) and resource (direct message). It distinguishes from siblings like send_dm or get_dm_history by emphasizing it is a delete operation for private messages.

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 description includes a note that the tool deletes a PRIVATE message and warns against bulk-calling due to X's anti-spam policies and potential account suspension. While it does not explicitly compare with alternatives, the warning provides contextual guidance.

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