wrike_delete_custom_field

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

The description only states the action without disclosing whether deletion is permanent, whether it affects tasks using the field, or if specific permissions are required. As no annotations are provided, this lack of behavioral detail is a significant gap.

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 a single concise sentence that gets straight to the point. It is appropriately sized for a simple delete operation with no extraneous words.

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 simple tool with one parameter, the description is somewhat adequate, but it omits important contextual details such as irreversibility, potential impacts on associated data, and permission requirements. More holistic information is needed for a delete operation.

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 schema already fully describes the sole parameter (customFieldId) with a clear description and required flag. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline of 3 applies when schema coverage is high.

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 the action (delete) and the resource (custom field), distinguishing it from sibling tools that delete other resource types like custom statuses or attachments. It is a specific verb+resource pair with no ambiguity.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as updating or listing custom fields. There is no context about prerequisites, edge cases, or when deletion is appropriate.

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