delete_solution

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It states 'soft-delete' but does not disclose critical behaviors such as whether the operation is reversible, what happens to related resources, or any permission requirements. The term alone implies non-permanent deletion but lacks specificity.

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 extremely concise (one phrase). While there is no wasted text, it lacks structure (no full sentence) and may not front-load the most critical information (e.g., that this is a soft-delete, not hard). It is appropriately short for a simple tool but could be slightly more structured.

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 the single parameter, no output schema, and the simple action of deleting a solution, the description is incomplete. It fails to clarify whether the operation can be undone, if the solution still appears in lists, or any side effects. For a deletion tool, missing behavioral context reduces completeness.

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. It adds 'by slug', indicating that the 'slug' parameter identifies the solution to delete. Beyond that, it does not explain what a slug is or any constraints. This provides minimal added meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 'Soft-delete a solution by slug' clearly states the action (delete) and resource (solution), and specifies the identifier (slug). It distinguishes the tool from siblings like delete_session and delete_story by naming 'solution', though it could further clarify what 'soft-delete' entails.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., hard delete, update status). The description only mentions 'soft-delete' without explaining implications or prerequisites, leaving the agent without decision-making support.

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