Delete content

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It clearly warns that deletion is permanent and cannot be undone, and it requires user confirmation before invoking. This is substantial and highly relevant for a destructive operation, though it does not mention permissions or failure behavior.

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 two sentences with no filler. The destructive action is front-loaded, and the irreversibility warning earns its place. Every word contributes to correct invocation and safe usage.

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 two-parameter deletion tool with no output schema, the description is complete enough. It identifies what is deleted, how it is identified, warns about irreversibility, and instructs user confirmation. Nothing needed for safe invocation 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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does by explaining that the slug identifies the target and by naming the three content types that correspond to the table enum values. It adds meaningful human-readable semantics beyond the bare schema property definitions.

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 ('Permanently delete'), the resource types ('blog post, case study, or resource'), and the lookup method ('by slug'). This clearly distinguishes it from content retrieval, update, or publish operations among the sibling tools.

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 gives clear usage context by scoping deletion to three content types and explicitly instructs the agent to confirm with the user before calling. It does not name alternative tools or state explicit when-not-to-use conditions, but the scope is clear enough to avoid obvious misuse.

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