rate_limit_limiter_delete

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It states 'Remove... entirely', indicating destructive action, but lacks disclosure of side effects (e.g., irreversible deletion), error states (e.g., limiter not found), or required permissions. This is insufficient for safe agent invocation.

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 extremely concise at one sentence, which is appropriate for a simple delete operation. However, it could be slightly more informative without adding much length, but it avoids unnecessary 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?

Given the tool has an output schema (not detailed) and no annotations, the description should cover basic behavioral expectations (what happens on success/failure). It does not mention return values or error handling, leaving the agent uninformed about the operation's outcome.

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 only parameter 'name' has no schema description (0% coverage) and the description does not explain it. The agent gets no information beyond its type. The description should clarify what constitutes a valid name (e.g., must match an existing limiter).

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 uses the verb 'Remove' and identifies the resource as a 'named limiter', making the tool's purpose clear. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'create' and 'list' by explicitly indicating deletion. However, it lacks specificity about what 'limiter' means, slightly reducing clarity.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when limiter exists, prerequisites). The description does not mention sibling tools like 'rate_limit_limiter_create' or 'reset'. An agent would have to infer usage from the name alone.

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