linkedin_delete_profile_section

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

While annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, the description explicitly states 'Permanently delete' and 'This cannot be undone', reinforcing the irreversibility. It also adds a verification step, going beyond the annotation by advising the agent to confirm before acting.

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?

Two impactful sentences convey the essential information: the irreversible action and the recommended prerequisite. There is no redundant or tangential content, making it highly efficient.

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 destructive tool with annotations and a complete schema, the description sufficiently covers what the agent needs to know: verification step, irreversibility, and the index-based addressing. It could mention response behavior or error cases, but those are not critical for a delete operation.

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 schema already provides 100% coverage with clear descriptions for all parameters (index, confirm, section). The description's mention of 'zero-based index' and 'within the section' aligns with but does not add significant new meaning beyond what the schema offers.

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 uses a specific verb ('delete') and identifies the resource ('profile entry') within a section, clearly distinguishing this from sibling tools like add or edit operations. It also adds the zero-based index scope, making the purpose 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?

The description explicitly instructs to call linkedin_get_profile first to confirm the correct entry, providing a clear usage prerequisite. It does not mention exclusions or alternatives, but the context is strong enough for an agent to know when to use it.

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