Delete A Drawing Area

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

Beyond the annotations (destructiveHint, idempotentHint), the description adds crucial behavior: 'Permanently removes', 'This cannot be undone', 'a repeat call returns 404', and common error statuses (401, 403, 404). This significantly enhances operational understanding.

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 well-organized and front-loaded, but contains minor redundancy: 'Confirm the target id with the matching show or list tool before calling' and 'resolve it with the matching list tool first' convey similar guidance. The endpoint and error details are useful but make it slightly long.

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 prerequisites (confirm/resolve id), permanence, repeat-call behavior, and common error statuses. While there is no output schema, the success result of a delete is self-evident; the error handling is the important context and is thoroughly explained.

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 schema already provides 100% descriptions for both parameters. The description adds value by noting that project_id defaults to the procore_set_config value when omitted and that id must resolve to an existing parent record via list tool. However, it also lists 'Required parameters: project_id, id', creating slight ambiguity about whether project_id is optional.

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 'Delete an existing Drawing Area in the specified Project', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_drawing_areas, create_drawing_area, and update_a_drawing_area by focusing on deletion.

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 explicitly instructs to 'Confirm the target id with the matching show or list tool before calling' and to 'resolve it with the matching list tool first'. This provides clear when-to-use guidance relative to lookup tools and highlights the need for preconditions.

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