Delete a post

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, and the description adds concrete behavioral details: the deletion cannot be undone, does not remove from feeds/caches, and requires explicit confirmation. These go beyond the annotation flags, giving the agent realistic expectations.

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 concise sentences front-load the key facts: what is deleted, irreversibility, cache caveat, and confirmation requirement. Every sentence earns its place 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 tool has no output schema, but for a delete operation the description covers the critical aspects: what is deleted, irreversible consequences, cache behavior, and the need for confirmation. Given the parameter schema and annotations, this is sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 parameters are already well-documented. The description reinforces the confirm requirement but does not add extra meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('one of your own posts'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like unrepost or unlike_post. It also clarifies scope ('your own posts') and confirms destructive intent.

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 explicitly says this deletes a post and cannot be undone, implying it should be used when the user wants permanent removal. It doesn't name alternatives (e.g., unrepost) but the 'one of your own posts' scope and destructive warning provide adequate context for an agent.

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