Swagger: Delete Table Of Contents

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

The description states a soft-delete operation, which modifies data, but annotations declare readOnlyHint: true, indicating no modification. This is a direct contradiction, and the description does not clarify why it's considered read-only. Additionally, the description lacks details on side effects or behavior beyond the schema.

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 relatively concise with a clear structure: two sentences explaining the action, then toolset label, then parameter list. It avoids unnecessary verbosity but could be slightly more compact.

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 description explains soft-delete and recursive option, but does not mention return values or confirmation. Given no output schema, this omission affects completeness. However, the behavior is adequately summarized for a simple 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?

Schema coverage is 100% and description repeats parameter info from schema (format of tableOfContentsId, default for recursive). It adds minimal extra semantic meaning, so baseline score 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?

Description clearly states the tool deletes a table of contents entry with a soft-delete, and supports recursive deletion. It distinguishes from siblings like swagger_create_table_of_contents and swagger_list_table_of_contents by specifying deletion specifically.

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 mentions the 'Table Of Contents' toolset, implicitly grouping it with related tools, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, nor prerequisites or exclusions.

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