delete_delivery_notes

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds no behavioral context beyond confirming deletion. It does not explain consequences like irreversibility, required permissions, or effects on related data. Given the annotations, the bar is lower, but the description fails to add any additional useful behavioral details.

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 (4 words), but it lacks necessary supporting context. Every word is used, but the description is under-specified and does not earn its place fully. It could be expanded to include usage notes without losing conciseness.

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?

Despite annotations and a single parameter, the description is incomplete. It does not mention what the tool returns (no output schema), error handling, or the scope of deletion (e.g., if multiple IDs can be deleted in one call, which is implied by the parameter). The description misses key operational context.

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 100%, with the single parameter 'delivery_note_ids' already described as 'comma separated delivery note IDs'. The description does not add new meaning but is adequate. Baseline is 3 due to high schema coverage.

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?

Description clearly states the action (deletes) and resource (delivery notes), with 'specified' indicating selection. The name itself is descriptive, and the description adds minimal but sufficient clarity. However, it does not differentiate from sibling delete tools like delete_invoices, which have identical structure, but that is acceptable as the resource is distinct.

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 such as change_delivery_note_status or update_delivery_note. There is no mention of prerequisites, side effects, or context for safe usage. The description lacks any usage guidelines.

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