aircall_delete_contact

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

The annotation destructiveHint=true already flags destructive behavior, and the description adds the crucial detail that the action cannot be undone. This goes beyond the structured annotation by warning about irreversibility, though it does not mention cascade effects or permissions.

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 short sentences, each with clear value: the action and an important warning. No redundancy or filler.

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 delete operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose and a key behavioral warning. It could arguably mention effects on related data (e.g., phone numbers), but the existing text is adequate for typical use.

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% with a clear description of contact_id. The tool description does not add any parameter-level meaning, but the schema already fully documents the parameter, so the baseline 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 clearly states the action ('Delete a contact') with a specific resource, making the purpose unambiguous. While the name already conveys this, the description does not explicitly differentiate from sibling delete tools (e.g., delete_campaign), but the resource is clear. No misleading information.

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 aircall_update_contact or aircall_get_contact. The description only states the action and an irreversibility warning, offering no context on selection criteria or exclusions.

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