delete_access_control_policy

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It fails to disclose the destructive nature, side effects, return values, or any behavioral traits. The inclusion of pagination variables (after, first, order) for a delete mutation adds confusion rather than clarity.

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 short but poorly structured. It is a run-on list of variables and an example, with no clear purpose statement or logical grouping. The long example JSON is not well integrated and the text is not front-loaded with useful 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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is extremely inadequate. It does not explain required vs optional parameters, what the delete operation does, or what response to expect. The 9-parameter surface with only 1 required parameter is unexplained.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds an example JSON showing the structure for 'notFilter' and 'order', which provides some semantic value beyond type-only schema descriptions. However, it does not explain why pagination variables are present or how they relate to deletion.

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 says only 'DRP Access Control · mutation deleteAccessControlPolicy' which restates the tool name in GraphQL mutation form. It does not explicitly state that this tool deletes an access control policy, relying on the name rather than explaining the action or resource.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus sibling tools like update_access_control_policy or delete_access_group. There is no mention of prerequisites, alternatives, or context for deletion.

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