delete_d_company_discovery_settings_id

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

With no annotations at all, the description must disclose destructive side effects, reversibility, permission requirements, or related resources affected. It merely restates 'delete' and gives endpoint/param details, which adds no behavioral insight beyond the tool name.

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 sentences with no fluff. The operation and endpoint are front-loaded, and the second sentence packs practical parameter placement guidance into a compact form.

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 generic params, absent annotations, and complexity of a deleteting resource, the description covers the basics but misses valuable context: what a discovery setting is, any impact on associated agent mappings, possible permissions, and the purpose of the body parameter. The output schema existing just partially compensates for return-value concerns.

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 0% and all params are generic object shells. The description provides some useful meaning by specifying that path_params should carry the route ID, query should carry filters and pagination, and headers should carry required headers. But body is not explained, and no concrete key names are given, leaving partial compensation.

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 identifies the operation as 'Delete discovery setting' and gives the exact DELETE endpoint, which differentiates it from get/post/patch siblings on the same resource. It stops short of a 5 because it does not explain what a discovery setting is or what the ID maps to.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like patch_w_company_discovery_settings or get_r_company_discovery_settings. The delete operation is only implied by the verb, with no prerequisites, exclusions, or mention of when not to use it.

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