Delete Goal

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

Annotations already mark the tool as destructive and non-idempotent. The description adds meaningful behavioral context by stating 'This cannot be undone,' which emphasizes irreversibility beyond what the annotations alone communicate.

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 two short sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core action and irreversibility, then provides the practical ID-discovery guidance.

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?

With a simple parameter set fully covered by the schema, explicit destructive annotations, and a clear prerequisite for obtaining goal IDs, the description provides everything an agent needs to invoke this tool correctly. No output schema is present, but none is required for this straightforward delete operation.

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%, so the schema fully documents both goalId and siteId. The description reinforces that goalId should come from rybbit_list_goals, but this is already present in the schema's goalId description, so no significant extra meaning is added.

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 a specific action—'Permanently delete a conversion goal'—with a clear resource and effect. It is immediately distinguishable from sibling tools like update_goal and list_goals.

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 gives clear context for use and provides a key prerequisite: use rybbit_list_goals to find goal IDs. It does not explicitly contrast with update_goal or create_goal, but the destructive framing makes the appropriate use case evident.

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