delete_table_row

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only mentions 'tracked changes' but does not explain what happens if track changes is off, whether deletion is reversible, or what side effects occur (e.g., index shifts). The modal effect (deletion) is clear, but consequences are not.

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 short sentence, which is concise. However, it sacrifices essential details, making it minimally adequate. It could be expanded while remaining succinct.

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?

Given 4 parameters with no schema descriptions and the existence of an output schema, the description fails to provide enough context for proper tool usage. It lacks parameter guidance and behavioral detail, leaving the agent underinformed.

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%, yet the description provides no explanation of parameters (table_idx, row_idx, author, document_handle). The agent has no context on index base, author role, or handle usage, making correct invocation unlikely without external knowledge.

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 action ('delete') and the resource ('table row'), with a qualifier ('with tracked changes') that helps distinguish it from plain deletion. However, it could be more explicit about the scope of deletion (e.g., content only or structure).

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like delete_table, delete_text, or add_table_row. The description does not mention prerequisites or contextual conditions.

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