Delete a course lesson

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false, readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the destructive/non-reversible profile is covered structurally. The description's 'Changes community state' largely restates destructiveHint, and the confirm requirement duplicates the schema's own parameter description, so it adds only marginal behavioral context.

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?

Two short sentences, with the destructive nature and the confirm guard front-loaded. Nothing extraneous, though the second sentence is doing little work beyond the schema.

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 mutation tool with full annotation coverage and 100% schema description coverage, the definition supplies the essentials an agent needs. No output schema exists, so there is no return-value gap to fill.

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 lesson_id, account, and confirm are already documented in-schema; the description only echoes the confirm semantics without adding new meaning. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the parameter burden.

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 (Delete) and resource (course lesson), and the tool name distinguishes it from delete_course_section and delete_course_lesson-adjacent siblings. It is clear but does not explicitly differentiate itself from the other course-mutation tools beyond the name.

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 notes the confirm=true prerequisite and ties it to a user-requested action, which is genuine usage guidance. However, it offers no when-to-use/when-not guidance relative to siblings like delete_course_section or archive-style alternatives.

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