delete_record

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It hints that omitting a value deletes all values, but says nothing about irreversibility, required permissions, or whether the deletion can be undone — significant gaps for a destructive operation.

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?

A single efficient sentence with the verb front-loaded and no filler. It is appropriately sized, though it is arguably too terse given what it omits rather than overly verbose.

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?

This is a destructive, no-annotations, no-output-schema tool, so the description should at minimum address irreversibility, confirmation expectations, or failure modes. Instead it covers only the bare action, leaving the agent without safety-relevant context.

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 coverage is 100%, so each parameter's meaning, including the value-omission behavior, is already documented in the schema. The description's 'or specific value' phrasing adds a marginal framing but no new syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 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?

States a specific verb (Delete) and resource (DNS record / specific value), so the agent knows exactly what the tool does. It does not distinguish itself from similar siblings such as set_records or update_record, which could also remove values, leaving differentiation to inference.

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 guidance on when to use this instead of update_record or set_records, nor any note about prerequisites or when deletion is appropriate. The agent gets a purpose statement but no routing context.

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