clio_delete_activity

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

With no annotations provided, the description explicitly signals 'Destructive' and discloses the two-phase execution requiring a confirm_token. This goes beyond the schema, which lists confirm_token as optional without explaining its role, making the behavior transparent.

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?

Two concise sentences pack the core action, destructive warning, and the critical two-step confirmation mechanism without fluff.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, destructive nature, and the confirm-token workflow, which is sufficient for a simple deletion tool with two parameters. It doesn't detail permissions or the preview return structure, but the description is complete enough for an agent to execute 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 description gives meaning to the confirm_token parameter by explaining it is returned from the preview call and required for execution. The 'id' parameter is not explicitly described, but its role as the entry identifier is clear from the first sentence. With 0% schema description coverage, this partial explanation is valuable.

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 opens with the specific action 'Delete' and names the resource 'time/expense entry', which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like clio_get_activity and clio_update_activity.

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?

It explains the two-call confirmation flow, which guides when to call once for preview and when to call again to execute. It does not explicitly contrast with alternatives, but the destructive warning and confirmation pattern provide strong usage context.

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