delete_d_company_edr_id

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It only says 'Delete edr' and the HTTP method, which implies mutation but does not disclose the irreversible nature of deletion, potential dependencies (e.g., cascading effects), or required permissions. Nothing about response status codes or error cases.

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?

Very concise, two sentences, front-loads the purpose. Points about path_params, query, headers are stated in one line, but the lack of detail means it underspecifies rather than being efficiently written.

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 tool's inherent destructive nature and the presence of an output schema, the description still misses crucial info: what an 'edr' is, what the output schema represents, and any safeguards. It is not complete for a deletion operation.

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?

The description briefly says to provide route IDs in path_params, filters in query, and headers in headers, but the input schema has 0% coverage and no parameter names or types. The agent cannot know what exactly goes where beyond a general hint, which is inadequate given the schema's emptiness.

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 edr' and the endpoint `DELETE /d/company/edr/{id}`. It distinguishes from siblings by being one of the few delete_d_ tools, though it doesn't explicitly mention what specific EDR resource is deleted, relying on the name.

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 on when to use this tool versus other delete or EDR tools. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., needing an existing EDR ID), nor does it advise against using it when other operations are more appropriate.

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