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

Description adds 'irreversible' beyond the destructiveHint=true annotation, and mentions bulk execution support. Annotations already indicate destructiveness, so the description adds value by specifying irreversibility and batch capability.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with purpose and irreversibility. No unnecessary words—every sentence adds essential information (operation, irreversibility, bulk support).

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?

Lacks output schema, so description should clarify return behavior or confirmation. It misses details on success response (e.g., deleted count or confirmation). The optional 'account' parameter is unexplained, leaving a gap for nested 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?

Schema has 0% description coverage, and the description partially compensates by explaining 'anthropometry_ids' for bulk, but does not describe 'anthropometry_id' or the optional 'account' parameter. The required parameter is left without semantic context.

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?

Description clearly states 'Delete an anthropometric evaluation from Dietbox' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like dietbox_antropometria_get or dietbox_antropometria_list by indicating it is the deletion operation.

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 implies usage for deletion and notes irreversibility, but does not explicitly contrast with other anthropometry tools like write or get. It does include bulk support guidance via 'anthropometry_ids', which helps when to use the batched parameter.

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