treeflow_delete_branch

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It does reveal a key non-obvious behavior: deletion is cascading, removing all associated nodes. This is valuable context for a destructive tool, though it does not explicitly mention irreversibility or any authorization requirements.

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 a single, short, front-loaded sentence. It states the action verb first and uses every word to convey the operation and its scope, with no filler or redundant detail.

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 two-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the description is largely complete: it identifies the resource, the action, and the cascading effect. It falls slightly short by not clarifying whether the deletion is permanent or what exactly counts as 'nodos asociados', but it is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100%, with clear descriptions for tree_id ('ID del bot/árbol') and branch_id ('ID de la rama a eliminar'). The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score 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 'Elimina una rama y todos sus nodos asociados' clearly identifies a specific verb (elimina), a resource (rama), and the scope of the action (all associated nodes). This distinguishes it from sibling delete tools like delete_leaf or delete_intent, and from branch create/update/list operations.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance or alternative tools are mentioned. The phrase 'todos sus nodos asociados' implies this is the cascading delete for a branch, but the description does not state when to choose it over delete_leaf or warn against misuse. The intended use is inferable from the name and context, but not explicit.

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