delete_tool

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

No annotations exist, but description fully discloses destructive yet recoverable nature, soft-delete behavior, versioning requirement, and error handling. Comprehensive for a delete operation.

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?

Description is concise, well-structured, with key information upfront. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

Despite no annotations or output schema, description covers all needed context: error scenarios, recovery, prerequisites. Complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 baseline 3, but description adds context: confirms purpose of 'confirm' (acknowledge destructiveness) and 'expectedVersion' (must be latest). Adds value beyond 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?

Clearly states 'Delete a tool' and distinguishes it from restore_tool. Explains soft-delete behavior and recoverability, making purpose specific and distinct.

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?

Provides explicit guidance: read first for version, how to handle 409 errors (stale version vs reference conflict), and mentions restore_tool as recovery. No ambiguity.

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