catia_delete_feature

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and non-idempotency; the description adds useful context beyond them — that the target must be in the active Body and that the tool 'never guesses which feature to delete', implying failure rather than a blind default. It does not say whether deletion is reversible or how the tree reacts, so it is strong but not complete.

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 sentences with no filler: the action and scope come first, followed by the recovery workflow. Every clause earns its place.

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 mutation with no output schema, the description covers scope, intent, and the failure mode that motivates it. It is nearly complete; only the post-deletion state (return value or tree effect) is left implicit, which is minor here.

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 parameters, including the enum values for 'kind' and the example name, are already documented. The description's mention of 'feature or sketch' largely restates what the kind enum encodes, so it adds little beyond the schema; baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete a feature or sketch') plus the exact scope ('from the active Body'), which separates it cleanly from siblings like catia_rename_feature, catia_list_features, or catia_get_tree. The GUI equivalence (right-click > Delete) anchors the action unambiguously.

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?

Gives an explicit when-to-use scenario and names the alternative it replaces: clean up a broken feature left by a failed Shaft/Groove UpdateObject rather than closing and recreating the whole document, then fix the sketch and retry. The agent knows both the trigger and the competing strategy.

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