delete_asset

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses only the core action 'Delete' but does not mention whether the deletion is permanent, cascading, or requires special permissions. This lack of contextual detail is inadequate for a destructive operation.

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 short and avoids verbosity, but it is under-specified rather than concisely informative. It omits essential usage context, making the brevity a drawback rather than an asset.

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?

Given the lack of annotations, output schema, and parameter descriptions, the description should compensate with richer detail. 'Delete an Asset' alone is not sufficient for an agent to understand invocation semantics, potential side effects, or the role of each parameter.

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 does not explain the meaning or purpose of 'id' and 'company_id'. The agent must infer that 'id' refers to the asset and 'company_id' is a scope, but no explicit help is provided.

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 ('Asset'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools that target other resource types like Company, Article, or Asset Password. However, it lacks additional context such as whether the asset is permanently deleted or any scoping details, so it stops short of a 5.

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 regarding when to use this tool versus alternatives like archive_asset (soft delete) or other delete tools. There is no mention of prerequisites or context where deletion is appropriate, leaving the agent without decision support.

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