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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses important behavior: the deletion occurs on the app's next sync, it affects the traveller's account, and it requires sign-in. These details add real operational context to the destructive and idempotent hints.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and delayed-sync behavior, followed by the consent and authentication constraints. Every sentence adds useful information without filler.

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 one-parameter destructive tool with rich annotations, the description covers timing, account scope, consent, and authentication. The only notable gap is plan_id semantics, which is important but partially mitigated by the parameter's self-explanatory name.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0% for the single plan_id parameter, and the description never explains what the plan identifier is, where it comes from, or expected format. It does not compensate for the schema's lack of parameter documentation.

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 a specific verb (Delete) and resource (a plan) and scopes it to the traveller's account. It does not explicitly name or distinguish itself from siblings such as edit_plan or get_plan, but the deletion action is clear.

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?

It gives an explicit usage condition ('Only when the traveller has asked for it') and a prerequisite ('Needs sign-in'). It does not name alternative tools or when-not situations beyond the consent condition, so it falls short of the highest tier.

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