delete_photo

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden and does well: 'Permanently delete' and 'IRREVERSIBLE' clarify the action's nature. It also mentions authentication requirements ('needs token to carry delete permission'), which is an important behavioral constraint. However, it does not disclose potential side-effects (e.g., removal from albums or sets) or error scenarios, so not exhaustive.

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 extremely concise: two sentences, no filler. The first sentence immediately states the action, the second adds critical irreversible and permission details. Every sentence earns its place, and key information is front-loaded.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (1 parameter, output schema exists), the description covers the essential: what it does, irreversibility, and permission required. It does not elaborate on return values, but output schema exists so that is handled. Missing a note on error handling (e.g., if photo_id invalid) but not strictly necessary. Overall, adequate for a straightforward 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?

The input schema has 1 parameter (photo_id) with 0% description coverage, meaning the schema itself provides no explanation. The description adds no information about the parameter beyond its implicit role. A description like 'ID of the photo to delete' would be minimal but acceptable. Instead, the parameter is entirely unexplained, failing to add value to the schema.

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 it permanently deletes a photo from Flickr. 'IRREVERSIBLE' emphasizes the action's finality, and 'delete' is a specific verb. Although it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools, the action is unique among the listed siblings (e.g., delete_album deletes an album, not a photo), so purpose is unmistakable.

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?

Specifies that the token must carry 'delete' permission, with actionable advice to re-run authorize.py if only 'write' was granted. This provides important context for when to use the tool. However, it does not discuss alternatives or conditions when not to use it (e.g., if photo is required elsewhere), so slightly lacking in explicit when-not guidance.

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