spoolman_delete_filament

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the destructive action but omits crucial details such as permanence, potential side effects on related entities (e.g., spools), or any requirements like existing references. This is a significant transparency gap for a delete 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, concise sentence with no extraneous words. It is efficiently front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 one-parameter delete tool, the description covers the basic action, but it lacks warnings about irreversibility or cascading effects on spools that reference the filament. This is especially important given the broader Spoolman context, so a more complete description would be beneficial.

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 schema already documents the single 'id' parameter with 100% coverage including its type and description. The tool description adds no additional semantics beyond repeating 'by ID', so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Delete a filament by ID' uses a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('filament'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling delete tools like delete_spool or delete_vendor. It is direct and unambiguous.

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?

Usage is implied: the tool is for deleting a filament when you have its ID. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, which is a moderate gap given the sibling tools.

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