automation_delete

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

The description 'Requires a JSON request body' contradicts the input schema where the body parameter is not required (default null). This inconsistency can mislead an agent. Additionally, no behavioral traits are disclosed beyond the action (disable), such as whether the operation is destructive, reversible, or if it triggers side effects.

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 (two sentences), but the first sentence repeats the endpoint and method, which is redundant given the tool name and context. The second sentence delivers the core purpose. It is concise but could be restructured to front-load the action and omit the HTTP verb line.

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?

The description lacks completeness for a delete operation: it does not state what happens after disabling (e.g., return value, confirmation), whether the operation is reversible, or what identifier to pass. With no output schema and no annotations, the agent needs more context to use this tool 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?

The only parameter 'body' has a generic description 'JSON request body' in the schema, and the tool description adds no further meaning. It does not specify what fields the body should contain (e.g., an identifier for the automation instance). With 100% schema description coverage, the description adds minimal value, leaving agents to guess the required structure.

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 'Disable instance of the object' which conveys a delete operation for an automation. The method DELETE and sibling tool names (automation_insert, automation_update) reinforce that this is a CRUD delete. However, the term 'Disable' is ambiguous (soft delete vs hard delete), and the description does not explicitly mention 'automation'.

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 vs alternatives like automation_update or automation_search. There is no mention of prerequisites, such as requiring the automation ID in the body, or when not to use it (e.g., if the automation is already disabled).

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