smartsuite_list_deleted_fields

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description adds that the API does not attribute deleted fields to their source application (so no app filtering), and that it returns slug, label, and fieldType. This provides useful behavioral context beyond the annotation. No contradictions.

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?

Three sentences, each conveying essential information. The first sentence states purpose and read-only nature. The second specifies return fields. The third adds scope limitation and a pointer to restore tool. No unnecessary words.

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 the tool has only one parameter and no output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: what it does, what it returns, its scope, a limitation, and a related action. It is fully informative for an agent to use correctly.

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% for the single parameter solutionId, with a clear description. The description does not add any additional parameter details beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline but does not exceed it.

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 that the tool lists soft-deleted fields, is read-only, and returns specific data. It distinguishes from active field listing tools (smartsuite_list_fields) by focusing on deleted fields and mentioning solution-scoping. The verb 'List' with resource 'soft-deleted fields' is specific.

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 context for when to use this tool: to see deleted fields. It mentions that results are not filtered by app, which sets expectations. It also suggests the next step of restoring with smartsuite_restore_field. However, it does not explicitly exclude other alternatives beyond the scope limitation.

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