Delete A Equipment Type

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

Annotations already provide destructiveHint=true. Description adds value by specifying that deletion targets 'Field Productivity records' and repeatedly stating 'cannot be undone' and 'permanently removes', reinforcing permanence without contradicting annotations.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with purpose. Contains minor redundancy (e.g., 'This cannot be undone' appears twice), but overall efficient and well-structured. Could be slightly more concise.

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 simple delete operation with two required parameters and no output schema, the description provides sufficient context: endpoint details, required parameters, the specific records affected (Field Productivity), and irreversibility. No gaps remain.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage for both parameters. Description only repeats that 'id' and 'company_id' are required, adding no extra context beyond what the schema already provides. 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?

Clearly states the verb 'delete' and the resource 'equipment type'. Mentions 'Field Productivity records' to provide context, distinguishing it from other delete tools in the sibling list. The description 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?

Explicitly says 'Use this to permanently delete the specified Field Productivity records' and emphasizes irreversibility. However, it does not provide when not to use this tool or suggest alternative tools for filtering or partial updates, lacking explicit exclusions.

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