panelica_plans_delete_v1_plans_id

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and the description adds value by explaining the operation 'permanently removes the resource' and listing the required 'plans:write' scope. This gives the agent concrete behavioral and authorization context beyond the structured annotations.

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 compact and well-ordered: purpose first, then HTTP method, category, required scope, and a clear destructive warning. Every line contributes essential information with no filler or redundancy.

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?

For a simple one-parameter delete operation, the description covers the critical aspects: what is deleted, how to call it, the required scope, and the permanent destructive nature. It omits response details and alternative-tool guidance, but this is a relatively low-complexity operation with no output schema.

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 has 100% schema coverage with 'Path parameter: id'. The description's HTTP line reinforces that id is a path parameter but adds no new semantic meaning. With full schema coverage, the baseline score 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 'Delete plan' with HTTP DELETE /v1/plans/:id, clearly identifying the verb and resource. It also adds 'permanently removes the resource,' which sharpens the purpose. It does not explicitly distinguish from sibling plan operations, but the verb and resource are unambiguous.

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 given about when to use this tool instead of alternatives like panelica_plans_patch_v1_plans_id or panelica_plans_post_v1_plans. The destructive warning implies caution, but there are no explicit conditions, prerequisites, or exclusion scenarios.

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