eds_da_delete_source

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the destructive action and auth requirement, but omits whether the deletion is permanent, cascades to versions, or can be undone. For a destructive operation, this leaves significant behavioral uncertainty.

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?

Two concise sentences front-load the purpose and token requirement with no redundant details. Every word earns its place, making it highly efficient.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter and no output schema, and the description covers the core action and token need. However, it lacks information about return values, error conditions, or post-deletion effects, which is a gap for a destructive operation with no annotations.

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 fully describes the single 'path' parameter with 100% coverage, and the description adds context by specifying 'from Document Authoring.' With full schema coverage, the description contributes minimal additional parameter semantics, so the baseline 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 uses the specific verb 'Delete' and names the resource 'authored source document from Document Authoring,' clearly distinguishing it from sibling operations like get, put, copy, and move. It leaves no ambiguity about the tool's function.

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?

The description states a prerequisite (Requires EDS_DA_TOKEN) but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives or when not to use it. It implies usage (when you need to delete a source document), but offers no exclusions or alternative recommendations.

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