delete_prompt_history_entry_api_v1_prompts_id

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

With no annotations, the description only covers the deletion action and the constraint. It lacks details on irreversibility, permissions, or error handling, but for a simple deletion tool, this is marginally adequate.

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 a single sentence that efficiently conveys the action and a key constraint. Every word is necessary and no extraneous information is present.

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 straightforward deletion tool with an output schema, the description covers the core purpose and a critical constraint. However, it could be improved by mentioning what happens when attempting to delete the active version or the success/failure response.

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 description does not explain the two parameters beyond what the schema titles ('Prompt Id', 'History Id') already provide. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should add meaning but fails to do so.

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 that the tool deletes a history entry and immediately adds a crucial constraint—cannot delete the active production version. This distinguishes it from other delete tools like delete_prompt_by_id, which deletes the entire prompt.

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?

The description implies it should be used to delete non-active history entries via the constraint, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives like get_prompt_history to browse entries or set_prompt_version to change the active version.

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