wb_dbs_order_meta_delete

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Delete', which mostly restates the tool name, and does not disclose whether deletion is irreversible, what happens if the key does not exist, whether only one meta entry is removed, or whether any additional side effects occur.

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 concise sentence with no filler words. It front-loads the core action and resource. It loses one point because its brevity comes at the cost of omitting useful parameter and usage context.

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 destructive delete operation with no annotations, no output schema, and zero parameter documentation in the schema, this description is too sparse. An agent can infer the general call shape from the required params, but it lacks enough context about what 'key' means, what order_id refers to, and what happens after deletion.

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%, so the description must compensate for both parameters. It mentions 'by key', giving some meaning to the 'key' parameter, but it never explains that 'order_id' identifies the DBS order, nor what a valid key looks like. The description is incomplete for parameter understanding.

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 action ('Delete'), a specific resource ('DBS order meta'), and the mechanism ('by key'). The 'DBS' qualifier helps distinguish this from sibling tools like wb_order_meta_delete and wb_cc_order_meta_delete. The parenthetical 'удалить маркировку DBS' adds a domain synonym but slightly muddies whether this deletes metadata or a DBS 'marking'.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that wb_dbs_order_meta_set/get handle the other meta operations, or that non-DBS orders should use wb_order_meta_delete. The usage context is only implied by the tool name and description, not explicitly stated.

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