delete-vendor

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

Discloses that the operation is a soft delete (makes inactive rather than hard-delete). With no annotations, this adds value. However, it does not mention required permissions, side effects, or any other behavioral aspects.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the key action and important nuance (soft delete). No unnecessary words, 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?

Given 2 parameters (one nested), no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the basic action but misses details on vendor parameter semantics, response behavior, and how to obtain the SyncToken. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 50% (only 'company' has description; 'vendor' is undocumented). The description does not explain the Id and SyncToken parameters, which are crucial. It adds no meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 verb (delete/make inactive) and resource (vendor in QuickBooks Online), and distinguishes it from hard-delete by clarifying it marks Active: false. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from other delete-* sibling tools beyond the resource 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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., directly updating vendor status). No mention of prerequisites, limitations, or when not to use.

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