invoices_delete_estimate

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

The description does not disclose any behavioral traits beyond the annotation destructiveHint=true. It does not mention irreversibility, potential cascading effects, or that the operation is permanent. Since the annotation already indicates it is destructive, the description could have added context like 'this cannot be undone' but did not.

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, only two words. While this is not verbose, it is under-specified and does not earn its place by adding value beyond the tool name. It is not front-loaded with richer context; it is simply minimal.

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, the description should at least indicate that the operation is permanent or require confirmation. The description provides no context about behavior on error, such as what happens if the estimate ID is invalid. The schema covers parameters, but overall the description is inadequate for an agent to understand the consequences.

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% description coverage for all parameters (altId, altType, estimateId). The description adds no additional parameter semantics. Baseline of 3 is appropriate because the schema already fully documents the parameters.

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 Estimate' is essentially a restatement of the tool name 'invoices_delete_estimate'. It provides no additional specificity beyond the obvious verb and resource. It does not distinguish between deleting an estimate and deleting an estimate template or invoice, which are siblings. The purpose is clear but tautological.

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 like invoices_delete_estimate_template or invoices_delete_invoice. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as the estimate needing to exist or be in a certain state, nor any indication of when deletion is appropriate.

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