wb_order_meta_delete

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. 'Delete' clearly signals a destructive operation and the key list indicates what subset of metadata is affected. It does not disclose irreversibility, error behavior, or whether deletion requires specific order status or permissions, though for this simple delete the core behavior is apparent.

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?

A single tightly worded sentence conveys action, target resource, scoping, and valid key values with no filler. The Russian gloss is helpful and does not bloat the text.

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 simple two-parameter delete with no output schema or nested objects, the description supplies the essential invocation facts: FBS order context, the action, and the allowed key values. It could add a note about success/error responses or irreversibility, but nothing is missing that would prevent a correct call.

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. It does so for the key parameter by enumerating the only valid values (imei|uin|gtin|sgtin). The order_id parameter is left to inference, but its meaning is clear from the name and the phrase 'order meta'.

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 and resource: 'Delete FBS order meta by key'. It also enumerates the exact keys (imei|uin|gtin|sgtin) and adds the Russian clarification 'удалить маркировку', so the tool's purpose is immediately distinguishable from sibling get/set and DBS/CC meta 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?

The scope is implied by 'FBS order meta', which separates it from DBS/CC order meta tools, and by the key list, which implies removing marking metadata. However, it never explicitly names alternatives such as wb_order_meta_get/set or wb_dbs_order_meta_delete, nor states when not to use this tool.

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