delete_mealplan_entry

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 says deletion happens but omits whether the deletion is irreversible, what happens if the entry_id does not exist, and required permissions — all critical for a destructive operation.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words; the action and targeting mechanism appear immediately. It is efficient, though efficiency here partly reflects under-specification rather than discipline.

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?

The tool is simple (one required string) and an output schema exists, so return values need no explanation. However, for a delete operation with no annotations and an undocumented parameter, the description should at minimum flag irreversibility and where the entry_id comes from.

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 single parameter carries only the title 'Entry Id', so the description must compensate. 'por su ID' merely restates that the argument is an identifier without giving format, source (e.g., from get_mealplan_week), or validation expectations.

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 (Elimina) and resource (entrada del plan de comidas) plus the identifier used to target it. It implicitly distinguishes itself from clear_mealplan_week and set_mealplan_entry by scoping the action to a single entry, though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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 instead of clear_mealplan_week or set_mealplan_entry, and no stated prerequisites such as needing a valid existing entry_id. The agent must infer usage purely from the name and one-line description.

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