Delete Preset

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full behavioral burden. It indicates deletion but omits critical details such as permanence, reversibility, required permissions, and side effects. For a destructive tool, this is a significant gap.

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 a single clear, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is perhaps overly terse for a destructive operation, but conciseness itself is well-executed.

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 explained. However, for a destructive tool with no annotations and an undocumented required parameter, the description is far too incomplete to guide safe and correct invocation.

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 does not mention the required 'nombre' parameter or explain its meaning. It adds no information beyond the schema's bare property definition.

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 ('Delete') and resource ('user preset'), which clearly separates it from create_preset, list_presets, and read_preset. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings or clarify scope beyond the operation name.

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?

Provides no when-to-use guidance, no when-not-to-use conditions, and no mention of alternatives or prerequisites. The agent must infer usage purely from the operation name.

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