Erinys Delete

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it does disclose one important trait: dependent rows are cascade-deleted via FK rules. It stops short of stating irreversibility, required permissions, confirmation expectations, or exactly which relations cascade, which matter a great deal for an unannotated destructive tool.

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?

A single compact sentence with the action and the cascade consequence front-loaded; every word earns its place and nothing is padded.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and the cascade note covers the key side effect. The remaining gap is disambiguation from sibling deletion-like tools and parameter clarification, minor but not negligible for a destructive operation.

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%, so the single `id` parameter is undocumented in the schema itself. The description only indirectly clarifies it by saying an observation is deleted, implying `id` is an observation identifier, but it never states the expected format or scope (e.g., global vs session-local).

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Delete an observation") and adds a meaningful behavioral detail about cascading dependent rows. However, it does not differentiate itself from close siblings such as erinys_forget and erinys_prune, which an agent could easily confuse with this one.

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 about when to use this tool versus erinys_forget, erinys_prune, or erinys_supersede, all of which plausibly overlap with deletion semantics. No prerequisites, confirmation requirements, or exclusions are stated.

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