delete_canned_service

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

The description only states that deletion occurs, with no mention of irreversibility, side effects, permissions, or impact on related data such as associated fees, labor, parts, or subcontracts. Since no annotations are present, this lack of behavioral detail leaves important safety information undocumented.

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, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It directly communicates the action and target.

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 delete operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description is mostly sufficient. However, it omits any indication of what happens after deletion (e.g., confirmation behavior) and does not address potential constraints or dependencies, leaving some contextual gaps.

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 'id' is fully covered by its schema description ('The canned service ID to delete'), and the description aligns with it. The description adds little beyond what the schema already states, so the baseline score applies.

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 a specific action ('Delete') and a specific resource ('canned service template') with an identifier. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_canned_service, update_canned_service, and list_canned_services.

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 implies the intended use: deleting a canned service template by ID. However, it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this tool over alternatives or provide any exclusions.

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