delete_records

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavioral traits. It says 'Delete records' but does not mention that this is a permanent, destructive action, whether it returns deleted rows, whether it is transactional, or any safety implications beyond the schema's note about accidental full table deletion. Minimal behavior disclosure for a destructive tool.

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, extremely concise with no redundant wording. It is front-loaded with the core action. However, it is so minimal that it might be considered under-specified, but for conciseness it is highly efficient.

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 destructive tool with no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values, side effects, or cautionary notes. The output schema exists but isn't described, and no context about irreversible consequences is provided. Given the tool's nature and sibling operations, more detail is needed.

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 all four parameters with descriptive text (e.g., 'Target table name', 'SQL WHERE clause expression'), and the description does not add further semantic meaning. Since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline of 3 applies; the description adds no extra clarity beyond the schema.

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 action (delete) and the target (records from a table using a WHERE clause). It distinguishes from read and update tools by the verb, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with sibling tools. The purpose is specific and unambiguous.

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 versus alternatives like update_records or read_records. There is no mention of prerequisites, caution, or when deletion is appropriate. The description simply states what it does, not when to use it.

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