wrike_delete_attachment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It only states the action 'Delete an attachment' without disclosing side effects, irreversibility, required permissions, or what happens to the attachment or dependent data. It adds no behavioral context beyond the imperative verb.

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 extremely concise—only three words—and is front-loaded with the essential action. It is not bloated, and the single sentence earns its place, though it sacrifices informativeness for brevity.

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 that there are no annotations and no output schema, the description is too minimal to fully inform an agent. It does not explain the consequences of deletion, whether the operation is permanent, or what a successful response looks like. The schema fully documents the parameter, but the overall context is incomplete for a mutation tool.

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 input schema has 100% coverage, with the parameter documented as 'Attachment ID (required)'. The description does not add any extra semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Delete an attachment' clearly states the action (delete) and the resource (attachment), which is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools that download, update, preview, or list attachments. It aligns exactly with the tool name and function.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to delete instead of update or download). There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or context about appropriate use cases.

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