Delete A Signature

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

Beyond the annotations (destructiveHint, readOnlyHint), the description adds critical context: 'Permanently removes the signature. This cannot be undone, and a repeat call returns 404.' It also discloses common failure statuses (401, 403, 404) and the company_id default behavior from procore_set_config. No contradiction with 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?

The description is front-loaded with the core action and includes useful endpoint and error information. However, it repeats the id-resolution advice twice ('Confirm the target id with the matching show or list tool' and 'resolve it with the matching list tool first'), which is redundant and adds unnecessary length.

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 (id resolution), behavioral consequences (permanent deletion, 404 on repeat), error handling (401/403/404), and the endpoint. The only weakness is the contradictory required/default statement for company_id, which introduces some ambiguity for the agent.

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 has 100% coverage for the two parameters. The description adds useful semantics about using the list tool to resolve id, but it creates confusion by stating 'Required parameters: company_id, id' while also claiming 'company_id defaults to the value set by procore_set_config when omitted.' This conflicts with the schema's required list and undermines clear parameter guidance.

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 the action 'Deletes a signature' with resource scope 'for the specified Procore company' and the exact API endpoint, distinguishing it from project-level signature deletion tools. The verb and resource are 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 instructs to confirm the target id with the matching show or list tool before calling, and to resolve the id with the list tool first. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternative delete tools (e.g., delete_signature_project) to explain when to choose this company-level variant over others.

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