wb_warehouse_delete

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that the action is deletion and provides no information about permanence, irreversibility, side effects on warehouse data, required permissions, or confirmation behavior. This is a significant gap for a destructive operation.

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 clear sentence with no filler. The parenthetical Russian translation is slightly redundant but harmless and may aid users familiar with the original API 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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, this description is incomplete. It does not address whether deletion is reversible, what happens to associated data, whether there are prerequisites, or what the response indicates. The agent is left without critical operational context.

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% and the description does not explain warehouse_id beyond implying it identifies the warehouse to delete. The parameter name is self-explanatory to some degree, but the description itself adds no meaningful semantic value over the schema.

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 uses a clear verb-resource structure: 'Delete a seller warehouse'. It is immediately distinguishable from sibling tools like wb_warehouse_create and wb_warehouse_update by naming the delete operation. The Russian gloss adds no ambiguity.

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 verb 'Delete' implies the tool should be used when a seller warehouse must be removed, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. It does not mention alternatives such as wb_warehouse_create or wb_warehouse_update, so usage relies on inference.

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