delete_tax_class

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

Annotations already indicate destructive behavior, but the description adds critical context beyond that: the inability to delete the Standard class and the consequence of orphaned rates. These are meaningful operational details that help the agent anticipate side effects and potential errors.

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 two concise sentences with no filler. Every clause adds value: the action, the restriction, and the consequence. It is front-loaded and immediately informative.

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, the description covers the essential aspects: what it does, the key limitation (Standard class), and the side effect (orphaned rates). With the annotations and schema fully covering parameters and destructive nature, no critical information is missing for an agent to invoke this tool safely.

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 100%, so all three parameters are already well-documented in the input schema. The description adds little beyond confirming the operation is 'by slug', which directly maps to the required parameter. No additional parameter meaning is provided beyond what the schema offers.

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 a specific action ('Delete a tax class by slug') with a clear resource and method, distinguishing it from sibling tools like delete_tax_rate or delete_shipping_class. It also adds important scope constraints (cannot delete Standard class), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 provides clear context and exclusions: it warns that the Standard class cannot be deleted and that rates will be orphaned. While it doesn't explicitly name alternative tools, the sibling list allows the agent to infer this tool is for tax classes, and the warning effectively tells the agent when not to use it.

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