Delete Action Plan Template Receiver

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

The description repeats the destructive hint ('cannot be undone') already conveyed by annotations (destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true). It adds no new behavioral context and contains a factual error about what is being deleted.

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 phrase 'This cannot be undone' is repeated three times unnecessarily. The description is overly verbose for a simple delete tool and includes redundant API endpoint details.

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 delete tool with annotations covering destructiveness and idempotency, the description still fails to correctly identify the resource being deleted. It offers no guidance on selection among many sibling delete tools and no information about the response.

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 coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters. The description merely restates that project_id and id are required, adding no extra semantic value beyond the schema.

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 states 'delete the specified Action Plans' but the tool deletes 'Action Plan Template Receivers', not the plans themselves. This mismatch misleads the agent about the tool's resource. Repetition of 'permanently delete' adds no clarity.

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 only lists required parameters and API info. It provides no guidance on when to use this single delete versus sibling tools like bulk_destroy_action_plan_template_receivers or delete_action_plan_template_approver.

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