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

The description discloses that both the document and its underlying PDF file are deleted, which is valuable beyond the destructiveHint annotation. No contradiction with annotations. It could be improved by stating irreversibility, but the annotation already signals danger.

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, well-structured sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the action and key details immediately.

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 simple destructive action with one parameter and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context about what is deleted. It could mention permanence or the response, but the annotation covers danger.

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 schema covers 100% of parameters with a clear description of doc_id. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond 'by its public id'. Given complete schema coverage, this is adequate but not exceptional.

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 explicitly states the action (delete), the resource (document), and additional context (underlying PDF file, by public id). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like 'archive-document' which likely moves rather than deletes.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. However, the sibling list includes 'archive-document' and 'make-document-private', which are non-destructive alternatives, but the description does not mention them or specify that deletion is permanent.

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