hcm_delete_aor

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

The annotations declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description correctly implies a destructive operation, but it adds confusion with 'unless --write'. It does not explain what happens to related data, whether the deletion is reversible, or whether approval is required. The description partially contradicts the annotations by suggesting a non-destructive '--write' mode.

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 short, which is concise, but the parenthetical 'unless --write' is cryptic and wastes the only sentence. It is front-loaded with the verb 'Delete' but the ambiguity undermines its efficiency.

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 tool with no output schema and minimal parameter documentation, the description is inadequate. It does not explain the deletion scope, side effects, or how the '--write' flag relates to the operation. An agent cannot confidently invoke this tool correctly based on the description alone.

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 0%, and the description only mentions 'AOR' without explaining the aorId parameter. The description does not clarify what an AOR is, how to obtain a valid aorId, or any constraints on the ID format. With a single required parameter and no schema description, the description should compensate but fails to do so.

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 'Delete AOR (approval unless --write)' states a verb and resource, but the parenthetical is confusing and ambiguous. It suggests the tool deletes an AOR unless a '--write' flag is present, which contradicts the tool name and the destructiveHint annotation. It does not clearly distinguish from sibling tools like hcm_delete_absence or hcm_update_aor.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The parenthetical 'unless --write' is unclear and could mislead an agent about when deletion actually occurs. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as needing an existing AOR ID or approval workflow context.

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