Delete BIM Model

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true. The description reinforces permanence ('cannot be undone') and adds a behavioral constraint (revisions prevent deletion), providing useful context beyond what annotations state.

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 somewhat redundant, repeating 'permanently delete' and 'cannot be undone' multiple times. It includes extraneous details (Procore API endpoint) that could be omitted. Concise but could be tighter.

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 tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers the destructive behavior, the revision constraint, and required parameters. It does not detail the response, but that is expected for a delete operation.

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 already provided. The description repeats parameter names and notes URL vs query parameter location but adds no new semantic meaning 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 clearly states the action (Delete) and resource (BIM Model), including a condition regarding revisions. However, it does not distinguish this tool from sibling tools like 'delete_bim_model_revision', leaving ambiguity about when to use this versus alternatives.

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 includes a key condition ('A BIM Model with revisions cannot be deleted') and notes required parameters. However, it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as deleting a revision instead of the entire model.

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