delete_reference_list_row

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for disclosing behavior. It only labels the operation as a 'mutation', which implies modification, but does not describe permanence, side effects, authorization needs, or any consequences. This is insufficient.

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 very short and contains no unnecessary words. It follows a clear structure: domain, mutation name, variables, and example. However, it is under-specified, but for conciseness it earns a high score.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description is minimal. It lacks information about return values, error behavior, or the effect of deletion. For a mutation tool, this is incomplete and requires the agent to make assumptions.

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 description coverage is 100% for both parameters, so baseline is 3. The description does add a concrete example variable JSON, which aids invocation, but it does not elaborate on parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 'Reference Lists · mutation deleteReferenceListRow' essentially restates the tool name in camelCase, adding only the domain category 'Reference Lists'. It does not explicitly say 'Deletes a row from a reference list', so it borders on tautology rather than a clear statement of purpose.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as delete_reference_list_column or update_reference_list_row. The description only mentions variables and an example, with no contextual usage direction.

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