ghl_delete_custom_value

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only states the action. It does not mention if deletion is permanent, irreversible, or requires special permissions, or what happens to references to the custom value.

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, focused sentence that frontloads the verb and resource. No redundant words.

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?

The tool is simple (one ID parameter, no output schema), and the description covers the core action. However, it lacks any mention of return values or error conditions, and for a destructive operation, additional context about permanence or side effects would make it more complete.

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?

The single parameter valueId is fully described in the schema ('Custom value ID to delete') with 100% coverage, so the description adds little beyond reinforcing the need for an ID. The tool description clarifies the resource is a location-level variable, but this is not parameter-specific.

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 action ('Delete'), the object ('custom value'), and the identifier ('by ID'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_custom_values, create_custom_value, and update_custom_value by naming the delete operation.

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, such as prerequisites for obtaining the valueId or exclusions. While the verb implies deletion, there is no explicit context or alternative recommendations.

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