Delete Quote

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds that deletion is permanent and cannot be undone, providing additional context beyond annotations. No contradictions noted. No mention of authentication or rate limits, but for a simple delete this is sufficient.

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 very short and front-loaded with the key action. The Spanish repetition is somewhat redundant but serves a multilingual audience. Every sentence is meaningful, though could be slightly more compact.

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?

Given that an output schema exists (context signal true), the description does not need to explain return values. It covers the destructive nature and irreversibility. It could mention prerequisites or error scenarios, but for a delete operation the information is adequate.

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 description coverage is 100%: the single parameter 'id' is described as 'Quote ID / ID del presupuesto'. The description adds no further meaning or examples beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline score 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 clearly states the action ('delete') and resource ('quote'), specifying it is permanent and by ID. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'update_quote' or 'get_quote'. The bilingual text does not hinder clarity.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies usage when intending to delete a quote, but lacks guidance on when not to use it (e.g., if deletion is not allowed due to dependencies). No comparison with sibling tools is provided.

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