brc_delete_customer

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It clearly discloses the two-step preflight and confirmation behavior, including that the first call returns a confirmation_required and payload preview, and that subsequent calls require explicit user confirmation. This adequately covers the essential behavioral traits for a destructive 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?

The description is concise, consisting of three sentences that front-load the action and then explain the two-step process. Every sentence adds necessary information 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?

For a delete tool with no output schema, the description covers the preflight step, confirmation requirement, and the need to show a draft in chat. It does not describe error handling or the exact format of the preview payload, but this is sufficient for an agent to understand the correct invocation flow.

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 description coverage is 75% (3 of 4 parameters have descriptions). The description reinforces the usage of confirmWrite with the preflight protocol but does not add meaning for id or companyName beyond schema. The confirmDelete parameter is not addressed. Overall, minimal added value beyond 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 clearly states 'Deletes a BRC customer by id,' providing a specific verb and resource. While it does not explicitly differentiate from other delete tools among siblings, the tool name itself includes 'customer,' making the purpose distinct enough.

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 provides explicit guidelines: first call without confirmWrite triggers a preflight, then retry with confirmWrite only after explicit user confirmation. It also clarifies that 'passing preflight is not confirmation.' This gives clear context for when and how to use the tool, though it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it.

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