aircall_delete_tag

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds specific context beyond that: 'Existing calls with this tag will lose it.' This directly discloses the side effect on other resources, which is valuable behavioral transparency. It does not contradict annotations.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the key side effect. There is no redundant information or filler. It earns its place with both sentences contributing meaningful content.

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 one-parameter delete tool with annotations and no output schema, the description is appropriately complete: it states the action and the main consequence. It could mention that the tag must exist or that deletion is permanent, but the destructive hint and the side effect already cover the essential context. The description is sufficient for the tool's complexity.

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 the tag_id parameter described as 'The tag ID to delete'. The description adds no further parameter details, but since the schema fully covers the parameter meaning, the baseline of 3 is appropriate. No additional semantics are needed.

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 uses a specific verb 'Delete' and resource 'tag', making the action clear. It also adds the important consequence that existing calls will lose the tag, which distinguishes it from other tag-related tools like list/get/create/update. This is a clear, unambiguous statement of purpose.

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 implies usage: if you want to delete a tag, use this tool. However, it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or provide any exclusions. There is no mention of prerequisites or relation to other tag operations, so guidance is only implied.

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