delete_download_client

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It conveys that the operation is destructive ('Delete') but gives no information about reversibility, impact on active downloads, associated data, or permission requirements. This is a thin disclosure for a mutation tool.

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 clear sentence with no wasted words. For a simple one-parameter delete tool, this level of brevity is appropriate, though it sacrifices useful context that could be added without much bloat.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description should do more to explain consequences, success/failure behavior, or constraints. It tells an agent what it deletes but not what happens after deletion or any caveats. For a destructive operation, this is noticeably incomplete.

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 100%, with the 'id' parameter already described as 'download client id'. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema fully documents the parameter.

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 is a clear verb+resource statement: 'Delete a download client.' It unambiguously identifies the operation and target, distinguishing it from the many other delete_* siblings by naming the resource type. It doesn't elaborate on scope, but the basic purpose is unmistakable.

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 tool versus alternatives like delete_series, delete_indexer, or other delete operations. No mention of prerequisites, whether the client can be deleted while in use, or any side effects. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name and schema.

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