dev_delete_flow

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The description only states 'Delete' but does not mention that this action is destructive and irreversible, or whether special permissions or confirmation steps are needed. Such transparency is critical for a deletion 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?

The description is a single sentence of 6 words, which is concise but overly minimal. It lacks front-loaded context like the project or Lamatic. While there is no fluff, the terseness undermines usefulness.

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?

Given that this is a destructive action with no output schema, the description should include details like irreversibility, success/failure indicators, or error conditions. It fails to provide enough context for an agent to understand the full impact of calling this 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?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters ('The flow ID to delete' and 'The project ID'). The description does not add any additional meaning beyond these schema descriptions, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses the specific verb 'Delete' and clearly identifies the resource as 'a flow from a Lamatic project'. This clearly indicates the tool's action and distinguishes it from sibling tools like dev_delete_context or dev_rename_flow.

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?

The description lacks any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., dev_update_flow for changes, dev_list_all_flows to find flow IDs). No prerequisites, restrictions, or when-not-to-use information is provided.

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