Удалить диалог

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, but the description adds crucial context: the deletion includes the entire correspondence and is irreversible ('Восстановить нельзя'). This goes beyond the annotations and paints a full picture of the tool's 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 sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and consequence, followed by a clear alternative. No filler words; every phrase serves a purpose. This is exceptionally concise and well-structured.

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 delete operation with two required parameters (dialog and confirm_contact) and a well-documented schema, the description covers all essential aspects: what it does, the irreversibility, the alternative, and the confirmation requirement implied by the schema. No output schema is needed for a delete operation.

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 schema already fully documents all three parameters. The description adds no additional parameter-level details, which is acceptable given the schema's completeness. The baseline score of 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'deletes' and the resource 'dialog', specifying that it removes the dialog along with the entire correspondence. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools, particularly dialogs_update, by explicitly naming the alternative for a different use case.

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 provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool (to permanently delete a dialog) and when not to (to simply stop receiving messages, use dialogs_update blocked=true). This clear alternative is directly relevant and actionable.

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