delete_asset

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only labels the operation as a mutation and provides no information about side effects, irreversibility, permissions, or impacts on related data—critical gaps for a delete 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 extremely brief—a stub label plus an example. While it is not wordy, it is under-specified and lacks a proper explanatory structure, so conciseness comes at the cost of completeness.

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 destructive mutation with no annotations and no output schema, the description should cover prerequisites, side effects, and error behavior. It provides only a label and example, leaving the tool under-documented and not clarifying its relationship to the 'assets' tool or other delete siblings.

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?

Although schema coverage is 100%, the schema's input description is a type-only reference ('GraphQL: DeleteAssetInput!'). The example variables ('assetId' and 'comment') add concrete structural meaning and help an agent construct a valid input, though field semantics are not fully elaborated.

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 reuses the tool name ('mutation deleteAsset') and adds no verb+resource explanation beyond the name. It provides no explicit statement of what deleting an asset entails or how it differs from sibling delete tools like delete_access_group or delete_pod.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The example variables indicate an assetId and comment are expected, but there is no mention of prerequisites, conditions, or situations where this tool is appropriate.

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