delete_measure

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the deletion action and a vague return of success status and details; it does not mention that deletion is destructive/permanent, potential dependency impacts, permission requirements, or behavior when the measure does not exist.

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 compact and front-loaded with the primary intent. The Args and Returns sections are organized and contain no fluff, making it easy to scan quickly.

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 operation with no annotations and no output schema, this description is not complete enough. It omits irreversibility, side effects, error behavior, and the actual structure of the returned dictionary, leaving an agent without enough context to confidently invoke the tool.

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 Args section adds meaning by describing measure_name as the measure to delete, and workspace/model as optional names or IDs, which is useful given 0% schema description coverage. However, the explanations are minimal, and 'ctx' is documented as an argument even though it is absent from the input schema, which could confuse an agent.

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 opens with 'Delete a DAX measure from a semantic model', a specific verb and resource. This clearly differentiates it from sibling measure tools such as create_measure, update_measure, list_measures, and get_measure.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no warning about cases where deletion may be inappropriate. The description never addresses that measures might have dependencies or that other operations could be more suitable.

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