delete_backtest

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

Annotations provide idempotentHint=true, which is a behavioral trait. However, the description adds no additional behavioral context, such as what happens upon deletion (cascading effects, irreversibility) or confirmation. It merely says 'Delete', which is obvious from the name.

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 sentence, concise and to the point. No unnecessary words or information.

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 delete operation, the description covers the basic purpose. The schema and annotations fill in details. However, it does not mention the output or potential side effects, though these are less critical for delete tools.

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 details the required parameters (projectId and backtestId) with descriptions and examples. The tool description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so 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 'Delete a backtest from a project' clearly states the verb (Delete), the resource (backtest), and the context (from a project). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like delete_project or delete_file.

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, when not to use, or alternatives. The tool name implies usage for deleting a backtest, but there is no elaboration on prerequisites or conditions.

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