delete_table

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

No annotations provided; description covers deletion and IndexError but lacks detail on side effects, undoability, or impact on document structure.

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?

One sentence, no wasted words. All information is front-loaded and relevant.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, output schema exists), the description fully explains functionality, indexing, and error behavior. No additional context needed.

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 single parameter table_idx is described as 0-based index with error handling, adding meaning beyond the schema's type and title. Schema coverage is 0%, but the description compensates well.

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?

Clearly states it deletes a table by index, with 0-based indexing and error behavior. Distinguishes from sibling tools like delete_table_row and copy_table.

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?

Does not explicitly state when to use vs alternatives, but the name and description make the purpose clear. Some guidance on when not to use (e.g., delete row instead) would improve it.

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