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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description discloses that deletion is irreversible, returns a count, and behaves differently for multi-table views. It also notes case-insensitivity and the need to use field names from discover_views, adding important behavioral context.

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 dense but each sentence adds value: it covers irreversibility, multi-table behavior, WHERE requirements, single-record deletion, count return, and the discovery prerequisite. It is well-structured and front-loaded with the core action.

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 operation with two required parameters, the description is complete: it explains prerequisites, return value, important constraints, and even includes examples. There is no missing information an agent would need to call it correctly.

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 already documents both parameters with examples, but the description enriches them: it explains that WHERE is required and supports SQL syntax, that a broad WHERE deletes all matching records, and that viewId must come from discover_views. This goes beyond the schema's basic descriptions.

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 clearly states the action (delete records through a Caspio view), the target (records matching WHERE), and distinguishes it from table deletion. It also explicitly mentions the WHERE clause requirement, making the purpose 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?

Provides explicit when-to-use: for deleting records from a view, with prerequisites (call discover_views first). It explains the irreversibility and gives guidance on how to delete a single record, and warns about broad WHERE clauses. It also indicates that in multi-table views only primary table records are deleted.

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