Delete Data Store Record

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the description's main addition is confirming irreversibility ("This cannot be undone"), which is genuinely useful reinforcement. It stops short of permissions required, whether deletion of a missing key errors or is a no-op, and whether any cascade occurs.

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?

Two short sentences with zero waste, front-loading the action and immediately following with the destructive consequence. Nothing could be removed without losing meaning.

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 two-parameter destructive tool with full schema coverage and a destructiveHint annotation, the description covers the essentials: what it deletes and that it is irreversible. Missing only edge-case behavior (nonexistent key, authorization), which is minor at this complexity.

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% and both store_id and key are documented in the schema with minLength constraints, so the schema carries the parameter burden. The description adds no syntax, format, or sourcing hints for either parameter, making the baseline 3 correct.

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?

"Delete one record from a data store" names a specific verb and resource and implies single-record scope, which separates it from get_store_records and set_store_record in the sibling list. It never names those siblings explicitly, so the differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance: nothing says to use set_store_record to modify instead, no preconditions, and no note on what happens if the key does not exist. The only implicit signal is "one record," which hints there is no bulk variant.

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