Delete Action Plan

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds emphasis on permanence and the API endpoint, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like cascading deletes or required plan status. It reinforces but does not significantly extend beyond 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 relatively concise but contains repetition: 'This cannot be undone' and 'This action cannot be undone' say the same thing. The endpoint info is useful. Could be tightened.

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 tool, the description covers purpose, permanence, and required parameters. It lacks details on idempotency or error handling, but given no output schema, it is fairly complete. Good enough for an agent to use safely.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for both parameters. The description only repeats that they are required, adding no extra meaning. Baseline is 3.

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 that the tool deletes action plans permanently. It uses the verb 'delete' and identifies the resource 'Action Plans'. It is distinct from sibling tools that operate on different resources (e.g., delete_action_plan_item, delete_action_plan_section).

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 says to use this tool for permanently deleting action plans, which is implied usage. It does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use it or mention alternatives like bulk delete. The warning about irreversibility is helpful but not sufficient for a higher score.

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