freeagent_delete_bill

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint true and idempotentHint true, so the safety profile is known. The word 'Permanently' reinforces irreversibility but adds no new behavioral context beyond annotations, and no details on side effects or error conditions are provided.

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 concise sentence with no filler. It front-loads the action verb and resource, making it immediately clear what the tool does.

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 the simple one-parameter schema and annotations covering safety, the description is adequate but lacks information about return values or behavior for non-existent bills. Without an output schema, this leaves some ambiguity for the agent.

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 fully documents the only parameter, billId, including a pattern and description. The tool description adds no parameter-specific semantics, but with 100% schema coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Permanently delete a FreeAgent bill' with a specific verb and resource, making the tool's function unambiguous. It also distinguishes from sibling delete tools for invoices and timeslips by naming the resource type.

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 such as delete_invoice or delete_timeslip, nor any prerequisites or contextual conditions. The usage is only implied by the tool's name and action.

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