delete_shape

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It correctly notes the destructive, irreversible nature via the word 'permanently', which is key. However, it does not disclose other potential behavioral aspects such as whether attached connectors or child elements are also deleted, or the nature of the response on success.

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, succinct sentence that leads with the action. There is no filler or redundancy; it efficiently conveys the core purpose.

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 with one required parameter, the description is adequate but lacks some context. It doesn't state whether the shape must belong to an open document, and since there is no output schema, it doesn't mention the return value or success behavior. However, given the simplicity, it is only slightly under-specified.

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 100%, so both parameters (shapeId and pageIndex) are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so 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 clearly states the verb 'delete' and the resource 'shape', and the qualifier 'permanently' adds precision. It distinguishes from sibling tools like move_shape or resize_shape which operate on shapes differently.

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 implies use when removing a shape from the page, but provides no explicit context on when to avoid it (e.g., if the shape is referenced elsewhere) or any prerequisites like an open document. No alternatives are mentioned, but none exist among siblings.

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