delete_salutation

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description itself adds no behavioral context such as permanence, side effects, or permission requirements. For a destructive operation, this is a significant 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?

The description is extremely short, which is concise, but it is under-specified rather than efficiently informative. It does not provide enough substance to be considered well-structured; it simply restates the tool's purpose in a sentence.

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 1-parameter delete tool, the description is minimally viable, but it relies entirely on annotations for safety context. It fails to explain what a salutation is, any deletion consequences, or whether the action is reversible, leaving the agent without sufficient context for a destructive operation.

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 single parameter 'salutation_id' is fully described in the schema as 'the id of the salutation', so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, but the baseline of 3 applies since the schema carries the semantic weight.

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 'Delete a salutation' clearly states a delete operation on a salutation, distinguishing it from other delete tools by resource type. However, it adds no scope or detail beyond the tool name itself, making it barely more informative than a tautology.

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, prerequisites, or alternatives. It does not mention any context or exclusions, leaving the agent without usage criteria.

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