Borrar una entrada pendiente

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only mentions the 'pending' status constraint, which is somewhat useful, but it does not clarify whether the deletion is permanent, if it cascades to related data, or if any authentication or authorization is required. The tool name 'delete_entry' and description imply a destructive operation, but the description offers no additional behavioral details beyond the status filter.

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 concise, a single sentence, and front-loaded with the action 'Borra' (deletes). It could be argued that it is too sparse, but it earns points for being efficient and not wasting words, though it lacks critical details. The title provides additional context but is separate from the description.

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 that there is no output schema and no annotations, the description is quite incomplete. It explains only the status condition but fails to mention return values, errors, side effects, or permission requirements. The tool has a single parameter and a simple action, but as a mutating operation, it should disclose more about consequences, such as irreversibility, which is absent.

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 input schema has one parameter 'id' with no description. The description mentions 'pending' status but does not explain that the 'id' must refer to a pending entry or what format the ID should take. Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description adds minimal value: it only clarifies that the entry must have status 'pending', but does not elaborate on the parameter meaning beyond what the schema's property name 'id' already implies.

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 the tool deletes an entry with status 'pending', but it lacks context about what an 'entry' is and how this deletion relates to other entry operations like edit_entry, upload_entries, or clear_sent. The verb 'Borra' (delete) and resource 'entry' are clear, though the distinction from 'clear_sent' (which likely clears sent entries) is not explicit, and the parent title 'Borrar una entrada pendiente' adds nuance but does not differentiate from siblings.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'edit_entry' or 'clear_sent'. The description only says it deletes a pending entry, implying it's for entries with status 'pending', but it doesn't provide context on when deletion is appropriate or any prerequisites such as permissions or status checks. There is no mention of alternatives or exclusions.

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