delete_agent_data

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds meaningful context beyond these flags by specifying exactly what data domains get destroyed (memories, profiles, episodes) and that it is scoped to a single agent, clarifying the blast radius.

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 two sentences with no filler. The core action and scope are front-loaded, and the usage context is given in the second sentence. Every word earns its place.

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 simple two-parameter schema and annotations that already cover destructive/idempotent behavior, the description sufficiently explains the tool's purpose and scope. Minor omissions like return values or preconditions are not critical for this kind of cleanup operation. The note about being used by the kernel adds adequate context.

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?

Both parameters (agent_id and session_key) have detailed descriptions in the input schema, including the nuanced behavior of session_key as a partition hint rather than a data filter. The tool description itself adds no param information beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline of 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 uses the specific verb 'Delete' and names the exact resource: ALL data (memories, profiles, episodes) for a specific agent. It clearly distinguishes this from sibling memory-manipulation tools by emphasizing it purges everything for one agent during deletion.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool: 'Used by kernel during agent deletion.' It does not provide explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use guidance, but the context of a cleanup/teardown operation is unambiguous enough for an agent to decide.

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