delete_meeting

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses the crucial behavioral traits: permanent deletion, deletion of ALL associated data (summary, transcript, tasks), and irreversibility. It also mandates user confirmation. This gives the agent complete awareness of consequences before invoking the tool.

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 most critical information ('PERMANENTLY delete'), followed by the irreversibility warning and confirmation requirement. Every sentence earns its place; no wasted words.

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 delete tool with no output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: what is deleted, the affected data types, irreversibility, and the required confirmation step. It fully prepares the agent for the tool's usage and consequences.

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 coverage is 100% (one parameter, meetingId, with description 'The unique meeting identifier to delete'). The description adds no additional parameter detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline 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 explicitly states the action: 'PERMANENTLY delete a meeting and ALL its data (summary, transcript, tasks)'. It clearly distinguishes from read-only siblings like list_meetings, get_meeting, and search_meetings by using the destructive verb 'delete' and emphasizing permanence.

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?

Provides clear safety guidance: 'Always confirm with the user before calling this tool.' This implies the tool should not be invoked lightly. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the destructive nature is self-evident compared to the read-only sibling tools, making the usage context clear.

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