Delete Affliction Type

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

Annotations already state destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds 'This cannot be undone' and 'Permanently removes', which reinforces destructive behavior but repeats the same point twice. No additional behavioral details (e.g., permissions, side effects on related data) are provided.

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 repetitive: 'permanently delete' and 'cannot be undone' appear twice. The sentence 'Permanently removes the specified Incidents. This action cannot be undone.' is duplicated. It could be condensed to 2-3 sentences without losing information.

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 incorrectly refers to deleting 'Incidents' instead of 'Affliction Types', indicating a significant error. It does not explain the return value (common for DELETE endpoints, but still helpful to mention) or any prerequisites beyond the note about Procore types. Given the tool's complexity and the error, completeness is inadequate.

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, so the description adds no meaningful semantic detail beyond stating 'Required parameters: company_id, id'. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already carries the burden.

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 tool deletes an 'Affliction Type' and notes that Procore provided types cannot be deleted. However, it repeatedly mentions 'specified Incidents' incorrectly, implying it deletes incidents rather than affliction types, which is confusing and misleading.

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 provides one usage restriction ('Procore provided Affliction Types cannot be deleted') but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives such as 'update_affliction_type' or 'bulk_delete_affliction_types'. The incorrect reference to 'Incidents' further undermines clarity.

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