Delete Agent

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered structurally. The description adds no behavioral context beyond those annotations, such as what exactly gets destroyed or whether deletion is reversible. It does not contradict the annotations, but it contributes nothing beyond them.

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 short sentence with no wasted words and is front-loaded with the action. Its brevity is appropriate for the tool's simplicity, though it is arguably too terse to be maximally useful.

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 with full schema coverage and annotations covering destructiveness and idempotency, the description is minimally adequate. It is missing usage context and any caution about irreversible deletion, but the structured annotations carry most of the safety burden.

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?

There is one required parameter, agent_id, and schema description coverage is 100% with the schema itself saying 'Agent ID to delete'. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, which is the baseline 3 case when structured fields already document the parameter fully.

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 verb and resource: 'Delete an agent.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like mistral_get_agent, mistral_list_agents, mistral_create_agent, and mistral_update_agent. It is not a tautology, but it stops short of adding any scoping detail.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no warning about when not to use it. The name implies it is for deletion, but the description adds no routing or usage context.

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