custom_fields_delete_custom_field_folder

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds no behavioral context beyond the word 'Delete'. It does not disclose irreversible consequences, whether the folder is deleted from a specific location, or any permission requirements. The description fails to enrich the agent's understanding beyond what annotations supply.

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 and front-loaded—a single, direct sentence. It is efficient and easy to parse, but it borders on under-specification. The brevity earns a high score for structure, though it sacrifices informational content.

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 destructive operation with no output schema, an agent needs to know the effects (e.g., if deleting a folder also deletes its custom fields) and any requirements. The description lacks these details, leaving the operation underspecified. It is not adequate for safe invocation without external knowledge.

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 schema describes locationId ('Location Id Defaults to GHL_LOCATION_ID when omitted') but id has no description. The tool description provides no clarification on what 'id' refers to (e.g., folder ID, location ID). With 50% schema coverage, the description does not compensate for the ambiguity of the required id parameter, leaving an agent uncertain about the exact value to pass.

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 states a clear action (Delete) and a specific resource (Custom Field Folder). It is unambiguous and matches the tool name well, though it does not explicitly differentiate from related delete tools like deleting a custom field. The verb-resource pairing is specific enough for an agent to understand the primary intent.

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. There is no mention of prerequisites, limitations, or context such as 'use this to remove a folder but not its fields'. The description offers no explicit or implicit direction for selection among sibling tools.

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