Delete Audit

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

Despite no annotations, the description discloses critical behavioral traits: the action is permanent ('permanently deletes') and affects all associated data. This gives the agent a clear understanding of the tool's destructiveness. A score of 4 is warranted as it almost fully compensates for the lack of annotations.

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, concise sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded with 'Data Tool' for categorization and wastes no words, making it optimally sized for an AI agent.

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 simple delete tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately explains the action and its scope. It could mention the need to call listAudits first or confirm the audit_id, but the given information is sufficient for a basic understanding.

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 input schema covers 100% of the single parameter with a clear description. The tool description adds no additional parameter information, which is acceptable given the high schema coverage, earning a baseline score of 3.

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 the verb 'deletes' and the resource 'website audit report and all of its associated data', making the purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools, many of which are get/export operations or other delete actions on different entities.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives, no prerequisites (like listing audits to get the audit_id), and no note about irreversibility. Users are left to infer usage context on their own.

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