delete_global_section

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It clearly indicates the destructive nature ('Delete', 'remove... from every page source') and adds safety context (two-step dry_run, atomic save). It does not mention irreversibility or auth requirements, but the dry_run safety mechanism is a significant transparency win.

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 concise sentences: the first states the core action and scope, the second explains the safety workflow. No filler or redundant phrasing. All information is necessary and 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?

The tool is a destructive mutation with no annotations or output schema. The description covers what it does, the affected scope, and the safety flag. It does not describe the return value or error behavior, but for a delete tool with a dry run, this is reasonably complete.

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 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters well. The description names the parameters (dry_run, section_id) and explains the dry_run flow, but this adds little beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 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 clearly states the verb 'Delete' and specific resource 'global section (Header/Footer/block)', further specifying that it removes the node from every page source. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_global_source and delete_page, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 clear context on how to use the dry_run parameter (preview vs. perform), but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like delete_page or delete_global_source. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are given, so it's adequate but not explicit.

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