delete_saved_search

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does not meet it. "Remove" implies a mutation, but it never says the deletion is permanent/irreversible, whether a confirmation is needed, what happens if the name doesn't exist, or whether any permission is required.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is efficient, though its brevity here reflects under-specification rather than disciplined concision.

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?

An output schema exists so return values needn't be explained, but for a destructive tool with zero annotations the description is too thin: no irreversibility warning, no auth note, no failure mode, and no help interpreting the single undocumented parameter.

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 required parameter "name" has 0% schema description coverage, and the description does not compensate at all — it never clarifies whether name is the saved search's identifier, a label, or a case-sensitive match. A destructive operation keyed on an unexplained name is a real gap.

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 a specific verb and resource ("Remove a persisted search"), which is more precise than the bare name. It does not, however, differentiate itself from siblings like save_search, list_saved_searches, or check_saved_search, so an agent must infer the division of labor from the names alone.

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 list_saved_searches or check_saved_search, and no stated precondition (e.g., the search must already be saved). The agent gets no signal about when this is the right call.

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