endpoint_delete

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

The description says it disables a tool and requires a JSON request body, but it doesn't disclose side effects, requirements, or what happens upon execution. There is a contradiction with the schema: the description claims body is required, but the schema has default null, making it optional. No annotations exist to mitigate this.

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 concise, but it includes unnecessary REST-like prefix text that may confuse. It is short but sacrifices clarity; it could be better structured with a clear purpose and parameter hint.

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 a single parameter with a vague description, the tool is incomplete. It does not explain the return format, side effects, or how to specify the target endpoint, making it insufficient 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?

The only parameter 'body' is described as 'JSON request body', which is a tautology from the schema. The description adds no semantic value about what the body should contain (e.g., an endpoint identifier), leaving the agent without meaningful guidance.

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 states it disables an instance of the object and specifies the HTTP method, but the term 'Disable' is ambiguous and doesn't match the tool name 'delete'. It lacks specificity about what object is being acted upon, making it only moderately clear.

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 on when to use this tool versus sibling tools like endpoint_delete_many. No prerequisites or context for appropriate usage are provided, leaving the agent to infer without support.

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