zuckerbot_delete_audience

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the permanent, irreversible nature and that deletion affects both Meta and local registry. It does not cover error cases or prerequisites, but is still informative.

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 sentences with zero waste. The first states action and scope, the second gives usage context. Every part is essential.

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 delete function with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose, permanence, and use cases. It lacks mention of response or potential errors, but for a straightforward delete it is adequate.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description does not add further meaning beyond the schema's 'Stored audience row ID'. No additional parameter details are provided.

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 it permanently deletes an audience from both Meta and local registry. It uses a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from list, create, or refresh sibling tools.

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?

It explicitly mentions when to use: stale audience, creation error, or freeing up slots. While it does not explicitly state when not to use, the listed use cases are sufficient and imply alternatives (e.g., refresh).

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