Delete Reports

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false, readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: it does not state irreversibility, whether deleted report keys can be recovered, or any auth/rate-limit context.

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 single sentence is front-loaded and free of filler, but it is under-specified rather than genuinely concise. It is there is no structure to help an agent beyond the raw endpoint.

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 destructive, non-idempotent delete operation with no output schema, the description should at minimum warn about permanence or reference how to obtain report_keys. It leaves the agent with only the raw endpoint, which is inadequate context for a mutation 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 description coverage is 100%, so all three parameters (domain, report_keys, report_class) are documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond 'with query params', so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 names the HTTP verb and endpoint (DELETE /v1/reports), which implies deleting reports, but it largely restates the title 'Delete Reports' and adds no scope detail (e.g. which reports, by domain/class). It does not distinguish this tool from siblings like fortimail.reports.list or fortimail.reports.download.

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 when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as reports.list to find report keys first. The phrase 'with query params' gives no conditional information about when this tool is the right choice.

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