Delete header rule

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, and the description aligns by noting it calls a DELETE endpoint. It adds the specific API call detail, enhancing transparency without contradicting annotations.

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 two concise sentences: the first states the purpose, and the second provides the API endpoint. No unnecessary words, making it highly efficient.

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 description is fairly complete for a delete tool with two parameters and no output schema. It covers purpose, resource, and the API call. Minor missing details like return status or prerequisite checks are acceptable given the tool's simplicity.

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 input schema has 100% coverage, with each parameter having a description. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond repeating the parameter names in the endpoint, so a 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 clearly states the action ('Delete header rule') and identifies the specific resource ('response header rule') and its association with a service. It also provides the exact API endpoint, differentiating it from other delete tools among siblings.

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 implies usage for deleting a header rule but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like render_update_headers or render_add_headers. No exclusion criteria or comparison is provided.

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