delete_transaction

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, but the description adds that the operation 'cannot be undone' and states the return value (deleted transaction ID). This provides useful context beyond the structured data without contradicting it.

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?

Four short sentences, each serving a purpose: the action, the warning, the prerequisite, and the return value. No filler or redundancy.

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 single-parameter tool with full schema coverage, annotations, and an output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does, its destructive nature, how to get the ID, and what it returns. No gaps.

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 covers 100% of the parameter with a description that already says to use list_transactions. The description restates this, adding no new meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 a clear resource 'transaction from Actual Budget by id.' It distinguishes the tool from siblings like update_transaction and add_transaction by focusing on deletion by ID and noting irreversibility.

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 use list_transactions to get transaction IDs, which is a clear prerequisite. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it (e.g., for updates), but the destructive warning and ID requirement imply the right context.

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