dashy_delete_section

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

The description adds value beyond the destructiveHint annotation by explicitly stating that deleting a section also deletes all its items, revealing the cascading destructive impact. It also clarifies how the target is specified (by index or exact name), which is important behavioral context.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the action and resource, with no redundant information.

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?

The core deletion operation is well described, but the optional 'filename' parameter is left ambiguous, and there is no mention of error cases (e.g., section not found). The output schema may cover return values, but the parameter gap hurts completeness.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It only partially explains 'sid' (by index or exact name) but says nothing about the 'filename' parameter, leaving a required parameter unexplained.

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' with a clear resource 'section' and states the full scope 'including all its items'. It also specifies identification by index or exact name, distinguishing it from sibling tools like dashy_delete_item.

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 usage is implied: it is clearly the tool for deleting sections, not items. However, there is no explicit guidance on when not to use it or references to alternative tools like dashy_delete_item.

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