Delete Coded Value From Domain

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

Annotations already mark this as destructive and non-read-only, but the description adds that a destructive switch and confirm=true are required. It does not describe downstream effects on existing features, which is a minor gap.

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?

A single short sentence that is front-loaded and wastes no words. It communicates the action and the critical confirm requirement directly.

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?

Annotations cover the destructive safety profile and an output schema exists, so return values need not be described. However, the description omits workspace_path and domain_name semantics and does not warn about the downstream impact of removing a coded value.

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%, so the description must compensate for the parameters. It clarifies code and confirm, but says nothing about workspace_path or domain_name, leaving two required parameters undocumented.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: removing an exact code from a coded-value domain. It is clearly distinguishable from the sibling arcgis_pro_add_coded_value_to_domain.

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?

Provides the key gating condition for use: a destructive switch is required and confirm=true must be set. It does not explicitly state when-not-to-use or name alternatives, but the context is clear.

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