hires_delete_email_template

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full transparency burden. It discloses that the operation is a soft-delete and explains the side effect on templates used in automations, which is valuable behavioral context. It does not mention reversibility or permissions, but the core side effect is addressed.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and contains no redundant words. Every sentence earns its place, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 delete tool, the description provides sufficient context: the action, the soft-delete nature, and the automation consequence. It lacks explicit reversibility details, but given the low complexity and complete schema coverage, the description is largely 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?

The input schema fully documents the single `id` parameter with a clear description ('Email template ID'), giving 100% schema coverage. The description does not add any additional parameter-level meaning, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 explicitly states 'Soft-delete an email template' – a specific verb and resource. The second sentence adds context about the impact on automations, which distinguishes this from a simple hard delete and clarifies the tool's scope.

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 deleting email templates but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like updating the template. The automation impact is a consequence rather than a direct usage guideline, so guidance is inferred rather than clearly provided.

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