delete_absence

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false, so the agent knows this is a destructive operation. The description's 'Deleting' is consistent with these annotations but adds no extra behavioral context such as whether the deletion is permanent, what side effects occur, or if any authorization is needed.

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 a single concise sentence with no filler words. It starts with the verb 'Deleting' to immediately communicate the action, but the phrase 'with given id' is redundant and could be replaced with more specific parameter information, slightly reducing clarity.

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 simple nature of a delete operation, the explicit parameter schema (100% coverage), and annotations indicating destructive and idempotent behavior, the description provides adequate baseline context. However, it lacks any information about return values, success/failure behavior, or consequences if the absence doesn't exist, which would help complete the picture for an agent.

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 has 100% coverage with descriptions for absenceId ('Id of an absence') and employeeId ('Id of an employee'), so the description doesn't need to explain them. The phrase 'with given id' adds no clarification about the distinct roles of the two parameters, so it contributes nothing beyond the schema.

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 the action (Deleting) and the resource (employee absence), making it unambiguous that this tool removes an absence record. However, 'with given id' is vague about which id (absenceId vs employeeId) is the primary identifier, and it doesn't explicitly differentiate from update_absence or get_absence, though the verb 'Deleting' does distinguish it.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_absence or create_absence_for_employee. There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or contextual hints beyond the verb 'Deleting', which implies removal but doesn't clarify scenarios where this tool is appropriate.

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