Delete Category

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

Adds substantial behavior beyond annotations: assignments are moved to the default 'None' category, a successful response returns the deleted Category ID, a repeat call returns 404, and common error statuses (401, 403, 404) are disclosed. It reinforces destructiveHint and readOnlyHint without contradicting them.

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 long but front-loaded with the core purpose followed by essential operational details. Each sentence adds value, including endpoint and failure specifics, though it could be slightly tightened 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?

Given the tool's destructive nature and no output schema, the description thoroughly covers success behavior (returns deleted ID), side effects (assignment reassignment), prerequisites (confirm id first), defaults, error handling, and permanence. This is highly complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 already describes all three parameters (100% coverage), but the description adds extra meaning by noting that company_id and project_id default to procore_set_config values, and that category_id must identify an existing parent record resolved via list tools. This goes beyond the schema's simple field descriptions.

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 opens with 'Delete a Category from a Project,' using a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like update_category_name and delete_subcategory by specifying the exact action and object.

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?

Provides clear context: instructs the agent to confirm the target id with a show/list tool before calling, and explains the default behavior for company_id and project_id when omitted. It lacks explicit 'when not to use' alternatives, but the guidance is practical for a destructive operation.

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