automations_delete_automation

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It reveals that deletion triggers an auto-reload of automations, which is a useful side effect. However, it does not mention that deletion is irreversible, whether the automation must be disabled first, or any permission requirements. It adds some transparency but misses critical details.

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 at two sentences (9 words). It is front-loaded with the primary action and efficiently adds the auto-reload detail without any superfluous information. Every word serves a purpose.

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 delete operation, the description covers the core action and a side effect. However, it omits important context such as irreversibility, potential impacts on dependent entities, or whether the automation needs to be disabled before deletion. The presence of an output schema is noted but its contents are unknown; description does not need to explain return values. Overall adequate but not fully complete.

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 has one parameter (automation_id) with no description, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description clarifies that the parameter is the identifier of the automation to delete, adding basic meaning. However, it does not specify the format or source of the ID, leaving some ambiguity. It compensates partially for the missing schema descriptions.

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 an automation by id. It uses a specific verb and resource, and the mention of 'by id' distinguishes it from any sibling tools that might delete automations in other ways (e.g., by config). It also notes an auto-reload side effect, further specifying the behavior.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as disabling or enabling an automation. No prerequisites, exclusions, or typical use cases are mentioned. The description only states what it does, not when to prefer it.

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