runmeter_delete

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

Despite annotations already declaring destructiveHint=true, the description adds crucial behavioral context: the requirement for confirm=true, scoping to a single ID, and the safety guarantee that it cannot wipe the store accidentally. This goes beyond the structured annotations and is highly valuable for an agent.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and every word adds value. It is concise without omitting essential safety details.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, safety guardrail, and uniqueness among siblings. With an output schema present, it doesn't need to explain return values. It lacks only minor details like what happens if the run_id doesn't exist, but this is not critical given the overall completeness.

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?

The description mentions both parameters indirectly: 'by id' refers to run_id, and 'requires confirm=true' explains the confirm parameter's significance. With 0% schema coverage, this textual explanation compensates well, though it doesn't spell out the boolean type or default value which are in 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 opens with 'Delete a single run by id,' which is a specific verb+resource+scope. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools by noting 'This is the only destructive tool,' making its 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 states that this is the only destructive tool and requires explicit confirm=true, implying it should be used for one-off deletions with caution. It doesn't explicitly name alternative tools for retrieval or other operations, but the context is clear enough to guide an agent on when to invoke it.

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