delete_orphan_visits

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

Annotations already indicate destructive and idempotent behavior. The description adds the config requirement (SHLINK_ALLOW_DESTRUCTIVE=true) and the existential scope ('all orphan visits'), plus the permanence of the erase, which goes beyond the structured annotations. No contradiction with readOnlyHint=false or destructiveHint=true.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the primary action and followed by critical prerequisites. No fluff, 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?

For a simple tool with one parameter and clear annotations (destructive, idempotent), the description covers the essential trigger conditions and scope. It lacks a definition of 'orphan visits' but that is likely provided by sibling list tools. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for an AI agent to invoke correctly, though it could mention that orphan visits are those not associated with any short URL.

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 coverage is 0% and there is one required parameter (confirm). The description only restates that confirm=true is required, which is already enforced by the schema's const:true. It does not explain the purpose of confirm (e.g., safety confirmation to proceed) or any behavior tied to it, so it adds minimal value beyond the schema.

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 uses a specific verb ('erase') and resource ('all orphan visits'), clearly distinguishing from siblings like delete_short_url_visits which targets a single URL's visits, and list_orphan_visits which is read-only. The scope is explicit: all orphan visits, not a subset.

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 states the required configuration (SHLINK_ALLOW_DESTRUCTIVE=true) and confirmation parameter (confirm=true), giving clear context for when this tool can be invoked. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, such as suggesting list_orphan_visits first or using delete_short_url_visits for targeted deletions.

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