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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden for behavioral disclosure, but 'delete CRM contact' only conveys that a destructive mutation occurs. It does not state whether deletion is permanent, whether it cascades to related records such as activities or deals, which permissions are required, or what the success response is.

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 four-word sentence with no filler and the action verb is front-loaded. It is concise to the point of being terse, but it does not waste any words.

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 an irreversible mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, this is incomplete. An agent cannot know whether the delete is soft or hard, what happens to associated CRM data, or what indicates a successful delete, so extra context such as 'permanently removes' or 'cannot be undone' is needed.

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 both parameters at 100%, so the baseline is 3. The descriptions 'contact_id' and 'organization_id' are tautological and the tool description adds no further parameter meaning, but an agent can still infer that organization_id scopes the deletion and contact_id identifies the record.

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 the verb 'delete' and the resource 'CRM contact' directly, so an agent can tell this operation apart from crm_contacts_get/list/create/update. It is clear, though it does not go beyond the tool name to explain what 'CRM contact' means or how this relates to the platform_crm_contact siblings.

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?

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided. The description does not mention confirming the contact exists first, nor does it contrast this tool with crm_contacts_update or any archive/soft-delete alternative.

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