Delete a non-member contact (lead). To delete a full community member instead, use destroy_community_member.

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that it 'changes community state' and requires confirm=true, which is useful framing, but the confirm requirement is also documented in the schema, so the marginal addition is modest.

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, front-loaded sentences that lead with the action and the routing. A stray double period ('destroy_community_member..') is a trivial blemish rather than a structural problem.

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 3-param destructive tool with full schema coverage, no output schema, and annotations carrying the safety profile, the description supplies action, routing, and the confirm guardrail. Nothing an agent needs to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 baseline is 3. The description restates the confirm requirement but adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema already documents for account, confirm, and lead_id.

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 (a non-member contact/lead) and explicitly distinguishes it from the member-deletion sibling. An agent can tell what it does and what it is not without opening the schema.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent: use this for a non-member contact, use destroy_community_member for a full member. That names the alternative and the selecting condition. Minor weakness: the named alternative doesn't exactly match the closest sibling (delete_community_member), and no other exclusions are given.

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