delete_template

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Delete', so the agent knows the operation is destructive, but it does not disclose whether deletion is permanent, what happens to templates in use, or any permission or error behavior.

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?

One short sentence with the endpoint included, no filler. The essential verb and resource are front-loaded and every word earns its place.

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?

The tool is simple and the only parameter is fully documented in the schema. However, there are no annotations, no output schema, and no mention of side effects or response behavior, leaving the destructive consequences partially implicit.

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 covers 100% of the single parameter with 'The template id', so the baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, which is acceptable because the schema fully documents it.

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 the verb 'Delete', the resource 'template', and the exact endpoint 'DELETE /templates/:id'. This unambiguously distinguishes it from sibling tools like update_template, duplicate_template, or publish_template.

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 given on when to choose this tool over alternatives such as update_template or publish_template. There are no prerequisites, conditions, or exclusions, so the agent must infer usage from the operation name alone.

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