delete_contact

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

The description discloses the irreversible nature ('permanently delete'), which is the key behavioral trait. However, with no annotations provided, it fails to mention potential side effects such as cascading deletions or required permissions.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no redundant words. It efficiently conveys the core action.

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 an output schema (not shown), the description covers the essential action. However, it could mention what happens if the contact does not exist or if the user lacks permissions.

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 0%, and the description adds no meaning beyond the schema for the lone parameter. It merely says 'by ID', while the schema already shows contact_id is a string. No format, constraints, or error behavior is described.

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 'delete' and resource 'contact by ID', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_contact or update_contact. The permanence is explicitly stated, leaving no ambiguity.

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 on when to use or when not to use this tool. There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or alternatives mentioned. The agent is left to infer based on the verb alone.

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