delete_submodel

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the action ('Deletes') and the HTTP method (DELETE), but it does not mention irreversibility, cascading effects on submodel elements, permissions required, or response behavior (e.g., 204 vs error). This is minimal transparency for a destructive operation.

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 two short sentences that front-load the action and resource. The HTTP endpoint is redundant but harmless. There is zero fluff, and every word earns its place.

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 simple delete-by-ID tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential action and endpoint. However, it omits any note about side effects, return values, or the role of the 'encode' parameter in the URL, which would help an agent use it correctly. Adequate but not complete.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage; all three parameters (host, encode, submodel_id) are already fully described in the schema. The description adds no additional parameter context, so the 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?

The description clearly states the action ('Deletes'), the resource ('a specific Submodel'), and the identifier ('by its ID'). It also maps to the HTTP DELETE endpoint, leaving no ambiguity about what the tool does and distinguishing it from siblings like delete_submodel_ref.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as delete_submodel_ref or delete_shell. It only describes the operation itself without stating prerequisites, typical use cases, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer context from the name alone.

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