Delete a subscriber's location

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, so the safety profile is partly covered. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: the downstream effects (delivery, audience membership, published data, irreversible state) and the confirm=true gate, which help the agent reason about consequences.

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 tight sentences with the action front-loaded and the risk/guardrail stated second. Every clause earns its place; little room for improvement.

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 supplies the consequence profile and the confirm gate, which is what an agent needs to call it safely. The absence of return expectations is acceptable since no output schema exists, though explicit sibling routing 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 account, confirm, and subscriber_id are already documented in the schema. The description only restates the confirm=true requirement, adding no format or semantic meaning beyond structured fields, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 (a subscriber's location), which cleanly separates it from siblings like update_subscriber_location and pin_subscriber_location by the destructive verb. It doesn't explicitly name those siblings to route the agent, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

It conveys the confirm=true prerequisite and warns of consequences, implying this is a high-stakes action. However, it never states when to choose this over update_subscriber_location or pin_subscriber_location, nor an explicit 'do not use' condition, leaving usage only implied.

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