Delete Comment

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds the ownership restriction but omits whether deletion is permanent or irreversible, whether replies or related data are cascade-deleted, and what side effects may occur.

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 sentences with no filler; the action is stated first and the key restriction follows immediately. This is appropriately sized for a one-parameter 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 simple one-parameter destructive operation with an output schema, the description covers the target resource and authorization requirement. It is incomplete only in that it does not explicitly state destructive consequences or reversibility.

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 0% and the description does not explain comment_id or how it should be obtained, so it fails to compensate for the schema gap. The parameter name and integer type are self-explanatory, but the description adds no semantic value beyond the schema.

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?

Description uses a specific verb-resource pair ('Delete a comment') and unambiguously distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_comment and get_comments. The ownership constraint further clarifies the operation's exact scope.

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 explicitly states a condition of use: 'You can only delete your own comments,' which tells an agent when the tool is not applicable. It does not name an alternative, but no sibling tool performs comment deletion, so the guidance is effectively sufficient for selection.

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