knowledge_delete

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states 'Delete...' without disclosing whether the deletion is permanent, reversible, or has side effects. For a destructive operation, this is a significant lack of transparency.

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?

The description is a single, well-structured sentence with no redundant words. It front-loads the verb and resource, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

This is a destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema. The description fails to mention success/failure behavior, whether IDs must exist, or what happens on partial failures. An agent would lack critical expectations for invoking this tool.

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?

The schema fully documents the only parameter (knowledge_ids) with type and description. The tool description adds no new semantic detail beyond 'by ID', which is already in the parameter name. Baseline 3 for 100% schema coverage.

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 clearly states the action ('Delete'), target ('knowledge assets'), and scope ('by ID', 'one or more'). It distinguishes this from sibling tools like knowledge_create, knowledge_get, and knowledge_list.

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?

Usage is implied by the verb 'Delete' and the resource, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. No mention of when not to use it.

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