Delete a filter control

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: the operation mutates community state and is gated behind a confirm=true guard tied to an explicit user request.

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 no filler; the destructive action and the confirm gate are front-loaded so an agent sees the constraint immediately.

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 output schema, the description plus annotations convey the needed essentials (irreversible write, confirm gate, community-level impact). It stops short of describing downstream effects on filter configurations or dependent state, which would make it fully 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, including a clear note that 'account' selects credentials rather than a remote community ID, so the schema carries the parameter semantics. The description's mention of confirm=true largely restates the schema's own wording, adding little beyond the baseline.

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+resource ('Delete a filter control'), which cleanly separates it from the sibling create_filter_control, update_filter_control, get_filter_control and list_filter_controls. It is clear but does not explicitly name those siblings or the scope of the deletion.

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 implies the when-to-use context via 'requires confirm=true for the user-requested action' and warns that community state changes, but it never names an alternative or an explicit exclusion (e.g., when to archive/lay aside vs delete). Usage is implied rather than spelled out.

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