delete_query

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

DestructiveHint already signals mutation, and the description adds useful context about dependency refusal and force behavior. However, it does not disclose what happens when force=true (e.g., whether dependent queries are broken or cascade-deleted) or how dry_run interacts with deletion.

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 that leads with the action and immediately states the key caveat. Every word adds information, and there is no padding or repetition of schema fields.

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?

With no output schema and four parameters including a destructive force flag and dry_run option, the description is too sparse to fully prepare an agent. It omits what dry_run does, what force actually permits, and what return value or side effects to expect.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for documenting parameters. It only explains force in passing, leaving source, name, and dry_run semantics entirely to the schema, which merely lists their types.

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 starts with 'Delete a query,' which is a specific verb and resource, clearly identifying the tool's core action. It also adds a meaningful behavioral qualifier about refusing when other queries reference it, making it distinct from sibling query-management tools.

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?

The description gives no indication of when to choose this tool over alternatives such as set_query, rename_query, or remove_step. It mentions the refusal condition and force=true, but does not explain broader usage context or exclusions.

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