Delete a ghost entry

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does mention that deletion is 'routed through SDUI,' which is a behavioral trait, but it does not state irreversibility, required permissions, or side effects. For a destructive operation, this is a notable 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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is compact and to the point, though it could trade a little compactness for defining 'ghost entry' or 'SDUI.'

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?

With no output schema, no parameter descriptions, and no annotations, the definition underspecifies required inputs and behavior. An agent would not be confident about what values to supply for section/urn or what 'SDUI' implies.

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 0%, and the description does not explain what 'section' or 'urn' mean or how they identify the ghost entry. The phrase 'profile entry' offers only a weak domain hint and provides no parameter-level meaning.

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 states a specific verb ('Removes') and identifies the resource as 'a profile entry that standard deletes miss,' which helps distinguish it from normal delete operations such as delete_post or remove_skill. However, the terms 'ghost entry' and 'SDUI' are unexplained, leaving some ambiguity about what exactly is being removed.

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 phrase 'that standard deletes miss' implies when to use this tool—when ordinary delete operations fail—but it does not name alternatives or state explicit when-not-to-use conditions. The guidance is present but only implicit.

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