Bulk Delete Managed Equipment

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

The annotations already provide destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, indicating irreversibility and safety of repeated calls. The description adds that the action is permanent and cannot be undone, confirming the destructive nature. However, it does not disclose any additional behavioral traits beyond what the annotations already convey, such as rate limits or authorization requirements.

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 relatively concise but contains redundancy (e.g., 'permanently delete' and 'Permanently removes' are repeated). It includes useful context like the Procore API path, but could be tightened. The structure is acceptable but not optimal.

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 fails to mention the return value or response format, which is important since there is no output schema. It also does not explicitly state that the 'managed_equipment_ids' array is required for the bulk delete; it only mentions 'company_id' as required. Given the tool has 2 parameters and no output schema, the description should provide more details about input and output to be complete.

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 has 100% coverage, with both parameters described. The description redundantly states that 'company_id' is required but does not explain the purpose or format of the parameters beyond the schema descriptions. The description adds minimal semantic value over the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 multiple Managed Equipment records permanently. It specifies the resource type ('Field Productivity records') and mentions it is a bulk operation. The purpose is unambiguous and distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'bulk_retrieve_managed_equipment' or 'bulk_delete_managed_equipment_attachment'.

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 says 'Use this to permanently delete the specified Field Productivity records' and notes it cannot be undone, providing basic usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or provide alternatives (e.g., for single record deletion or non-Field Productivity records). The guidance is present but not comprehensive.

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