Delete a post

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the danger is already flagged. The description adds non-obvious operational context the annotations do not carry: a required safety.allowDestructive flag and a confirm-equals-postId guard. That is genuine added value beyond the structured fields.

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 tight sentences with the action front-loaded and the safety requirements second. Every clause carries information; nothing is redundant padding.

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, the description covers the critical invocation requirements (safety flag and confirmation). It does not state what happens to linked/child resources on delete, a minor gap given the annotations already signal destructiveness.

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 only 50% (postId has no description), so the description must compensate, and it does: 'by id' explains postId and 'confirm equal to the post id' reinforces the confirm constraint already in the schema. Both parameters are semantically covered.

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 and resource ('Delete a post by id'), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling mutations like buffer_create_post and buffer_update_post. It stops short of explicitly naming or contrasting an alternative, so it sits just below the top band.

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?

It supplies a real precondition ('Requires safety.allowDestructive=true and confirm equal to the post id'), which tells the agent how to invoke it safely. However, it gives no guidance on when to delete versus update/unpublish a post, so the when-to-use dimension is only implied.

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