Bulk Delete Materials

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

The description goes beyond the annotations by disclosing destructive permanence ('cannot be undone'), the 404 on repeat calls, and common error statuses (401, 403, 404). It also explains the payload transformation (top-level arguments nested under 'time_and_material_materials'). This is rich behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint/destructiveHint flags.

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?

Every sentence adds useful information: purpose, prerequisite, parameter handling, destructive consequence, error codes, required params, and API endpoint. It is front-loaded with the core action and remains structured and tight despite the detail.

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 fully covers usage prerequisites, behavioral consequences, error handling, defaulting, and the API endpoint. With no output schema, it need not describe return values. The tool is complex (bulk destructive operation) and the description addresses all critical aspects.

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 coverage is 100%, so the parameters are already documented. The description adds value by explaining how to pass the array (top-level arguments vs. nested payload), the defaulting of project_id, and advice to confirm IDs first. This goes beyond the raw schema descriptions.

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 the action clearly: 'Bulk delete Material entries with one request.' It identifies the resource (Material entries), the operation (bulk delete), and distinguishes from single-delete siblings by emphasizing the bulk nature and the 'bulk_destroy' endpoint.

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?

Provides explicit instruction to 'Confirm the target id with the matching show or list tool before calling,' which is a clear prerequisite. It also explains project_id defaulting behavior and error scenarios, giving context on when and how to invoke. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the bulk-versus-single delete distinction is implicit in the description and sibling tool names.

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