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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint: true, but the description adds no context about consequences such as whether the deletion is permanent, whether related data is cascaded, or any required permissions. No additional behavioral traits are disclosed beyond the action itself.

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 concise sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource. It contains no redundant or filler words, though it is arguably too sparse to fully inform an agent.

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 is too minimal. It fails to mention the outcome of a successful deletion, behavior when the template does not exist, or any side effects, leaving informational gaps that annotations alone do not fill.

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 has no description for templateId, and the tool description does not compensate. It doesn't mention that the parameter identifies which template to delete, leaving the agent to infer this from the tool name and schema property name. Parameter semantics are not enriched beyond the schema.

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' with the resource 'enrichment template', clearly distinguishing it from the sibling tools that create, get, list, or update enrichment templates. It is direct and 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 no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It simply restates the action implied by the name, with no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or cases where a different tool (e.g., update or get) would be more appropriate.

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