delete_ad

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and idempotentHint=false. The description adds important behavioral context beyond annotations: the delete requires a two-step confirmation flow involving a returned hash. This clarifies that the deletion is not immediate and depends on an additional confirmation call.

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 short sentences, no wasted words. The core action is front-loaded, and the essential confirmation protocol is stated immediately after. Every word contributes to correct invocation.

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 two-step confirmation behavior, the description provides the essential sequence and the role of confirm_hash. The required ad_id is obvious, and an output schema exists. It could be slightly more explicit that the second call should also include the ad_id, but the schema requiring ad_id covers that.

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%, so the description must carry the parameter meaning. It does explain confirm_hash's role clearly: omit it on first call, then pass the returned hash to confirm. ad_id is not described in detail, but its meaning is self-evident from the name and the tool's purpose.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Delete an ad.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like edit_ad, clone_ad, launch_ad, and get_ad. The additional confirmation-flow detail reinforces the tool's unique purpose.

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 gives explicit how-to guidance: 'First call without confirm_hash; pass the returned hash to confirm.' This is a clear procedural instruction. It does not explicitly compare against alternatives or state when not to use the tool, but the delete intent makes the primary use case obvious.

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