Delete A Person

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

Beyond the annotations (destructiveHint=true), the description discloses that deletion is permanent, cannot be undone, and that a repeat call returns 404. It also details error payload behavior with common HTTP statuses (401/403/404) and the company_id default, adding substantial behavioral context.

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 front-loaded with the core action in the first sentence, and every subsequent sentence contributes useful information about prerequisites, permanence, error handling, and the endpoint. It is dense but not padded.

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 two-parameter delete operation with no output schema, the description covers prerequisites, defaults, irreversibility, error semantics, and the API endpoint. The only minor gap is the absence of success-response detail, but that is minimal for a delete tool.

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% coverage of both parameters as URL path parameters. The description adds value by explaining company_id falls back to the procore_set_config value and that person_id must reference an existing parent record resolved via a list tool.

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 opening sentence 'Deletes a Person for a given company and person ID' uses a specific verb, resource, and scope, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_a_person, get_a_single_person, or list_project_types. It is unambiguous about the destructive action and the target of that action.

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 the agent to 'Confirm the target id with the matching show or list tool before calling' and to resolve person_id with a list tool first, providing clear prerequisites. It also notes the company_id default from procore_set_config. However, it does not name specific alternative tools or state explicit when-not-to-use conditions.

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