delete-page

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses two key traits: the operation is permanent/irreversible, and it requires admin/sysop rights. It doesn't mention rate limits, edit summaries, or what the response contains, but the two disclosed traits are the most safety-critical ones for a destructive operation.

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, zero waste, front-loaded with the destructive action first, then the permission requirement. Ideal density for a simple tool.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essential facts an agent needs: what it does, that it's permanent, and that elevated permissions are required. It doesn't mention failure modes or return values, but the core call-critical information is present.

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 all four parameters (user, wiki, title, reason) are already documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter detail beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 (wiki page), plus the critical qualifier 'permanently' which distinguishes it from the sibling undelete-page. An agent can immediately tell what this does and how it differs from the restore tool.

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 when to use it (permanent page removal requiring admin rights) versus undelete-page, but doesn't explicitly name the alternative or spell out the when/when-not condition. The permanence qualifier gives clear context that this is irreversible.

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