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

There are no annotations, so the description carries full burden. It explicitly discloses the mechanism ('Sets removed_at') and the key behavioral trait (history preserved via time slider), adding meaningful context beyond simple 'delete' terminology. It does not mention reversibility or permissions, but the core behavior is well covered.

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 the exact action ('Sets removed_at'), and every clause adds value about history preservation. There is no filler or redundancy.

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?

The description covers the core soft-delete behavior and historical visibility, which is essential for a deletion tool. However, it omits any explanation of parameters, possible output, or error conditions. Given the lack of annotations and output schema, the description is serviceable but not fully complete.

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%. The description provides no explanation for the two parameters (id and slug), leaving the agent to guess their roles and relationship to the API entry. The parameter names alone are insufficient, especially since both are just minLength-1 strings.

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 a specific action ('Sets removed_at on the API') and resource (API entry), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_edge and delete_node. The title 'Soft-delete an API entry' reinforces the same specific verb+resource.

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 by noting history is preserved and the API remains visible in past season views, which hints at soft-delete semantics. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it name any sibling tools or exclusion criteria.

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