max_delete_objects

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that deletions are grouped into one undo block, which tells the agent the operation is batched and potentially reversible as a unit, but it omits permissions, failure behavior for missing names, and whether anything is returned.

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 short lines, front-loaded with the action and scope, and every phrase adds information. Nothing is redundant.

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 one-parameter deletion tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the core action and undo grouping but is not complete enough about destructive impact, missing-name behavior, or return values.

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%, so the description must compensate, but it only restates that 'names' are node names to delete. It does not clarify array semantics, whether multiple names are supported atomically, duplicate handling, or whether names are leaf names versus full paths.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Delete nodes') and adds a meaningful scope constraint ('by name inside one undo block'), so an agent can tell this apart from creation, query, or property-setting siblings. It stops short of explicitly naming alternatives or contrasting with them.

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 such as max_query_objects or max_set_property, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. Usage is only implied by the verb 'delete'.

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