delete_message

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it offers nothing beyond the mutating action 'delete'. It does not state whether deletion is permanent, requires special permissions, or has side effects like cascade reactions or audit logging.

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 a single sentence, but it is under-specified, essentially repeating the tool's name. This is not efficient conciseness; it omits operational context that a user would need, making it inadequate as a standalone explanation.

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 tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description should at least hint at consequences, error handling, or permission requirements. It provides none, leaving the agent without essential context to predict behavior after invocation.

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% with both channel_id and message_id described adequately. The description adds no parameter-level details, but the schema already documents the two required identifiers, so a 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 'Delete a message' is a direct restatement of the tool name, adding no additional specificity about the operation's scope or target. It does not distinguish itself from similarly named siblings beyond the action word, which is already implied by the name.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as edit_message or pin_message. There is no mention of prerequisites, permissions, or contexts where deletion is appropriate.

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