delete_translation

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It fails to state that deletion is permanent, irreversible, or has side effects on related data. The only extra detail is the PRO+ plan restriction, which is not a behavioral trait but a billing constraint.

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 extremely concise: one short sentence plus a plan requirement. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and contains no filler. However, it is so terse that it lacks useful structure beyond the basic action, precluding a perfect score.

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 mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and no parameter schema, the description should provide substantial context. It does not mention return values, reversibility, internationalization implications, or how to identify the translation. The sibling tools show a rich translation workflow, but this description fails to address its role effectively.

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 input schema is empty with additionalProperties allowed, so there are zero defined parameters. The description does not clarify how to specify which translation to delete (e.g., by ID), leaving ambiguity. While baseline for zero params is 4, the description fails to compensate for the lack of schema guidance.

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') and the resource ('a translation'), with a specific verb+resource structure. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_translation, upload_translation, and approve_translation, making the tool's purpose 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, what prerequisites exist (other than PRO+ plan), or how it fits into a translation workflow. The description mentions the plan requirement but does not explain context or exclusions.

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