Feeds Feed Delete

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden for a destructive operation. It does not say whether deletion is permanent, whether imported items, tamper configs, or logs are cascaded, or what permissions are required — all critical for a delete 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?

One short sentence that is front-loaded and wastes no words, which is good. But it is undersized for a destructive tool, so brevity here reflects under-specification rather than tight writing.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, but for a mutation with no annotations and an undocumented parameter, the description should cover permanence, side effects, and ID sourcing. It covers none of these.

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 single required feed_id parameter is undocumented in both schema and description. The description adds no format, ID source, or referencing detail beyond the schema's bare string type.

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 (a feed), so the agent knows exactly what operation this performs. However it does nothing to distinguish itself from sibling feeds_feed_update, feeds_feed_list, or feeds_feed_get beyond the verb.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus feeds_feed_update or feeds_import, no prerequisites, and no mention of consequences. The description offers only the bare assertion of the operation with no usage context.

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