aras_delete_item

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing destructive behavior. It declares deletion, distinguishes purge from delete, requires explicit confirmation, and warns about read-only environments. It stops short of stating irreversibility or required permissions, but the core behavioral profile is clear.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the action and then constraints; every sentence carries a distinct piece of information and there is no filler.

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 5-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, it covers the essential prerequisites, mode semantics, and confirmation requirement. It does not describe the return value or the exact behavior when aras_plan_delete reports warnings, but the remaining gaps are secondary.

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 coverage is 60%, and the schema already documents the modo enum and the conferma Boolean. The description reinforces that 'delete' affects all generations and adds the plan-delete prerequisite, but it adds little meaning for id, itemType, or ignoraAvvertenze beyond what the schema already states.

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 begins with a precise action ('Cancella un elemento') and clarifies the two destructive modes ('purge elimina solo la generazione indicata, delete elimina TUTTE le generazioni'), which makes the tool's role and scope unambiguous relative to sibling create/update/plan 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?

It gives an explicit prerequisite ('Chiama prima aras_plan_delete') and an environment exclusion ('Disabilitato in sola lettura'). It does not enumerate when not to use the tool, but deletion has no direct sibling alternative, so the guidance is sufficient.

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