Delete Change Event

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint: true and idempotentHint: true. The description reinforces this by stating 'This cannot be undone' and 'Permanently removes'. It adds no contradictions and provides additional context about permanent deletion beyond what annotations convey. The API endpoint info is extra but not contradictory.

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 (3 sentences) but repeats 'cannot be undone' twice. It front-loads the core purpose and includes relevant API details. Minor redundancy prevents a perfect score, but it remains efficient and clear.

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 operation with no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, required parameters, irreversibility, and API endpoint. It does not specify return behavior (e.g., success response), but that is typical for delete tools. The context is sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's effect.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters (id, project_id). The description merely lists them as required but does not add new semantic meaning beyond what the schema already provides. Thus, the description adds minimal value here, meeting the baseline of 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 the tool's action: 'Delete Change Event' and 'permanently delete the specified Change Events'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools (which include create, update, show, and bulk delete variants) by focusing on a single-resource irreversible delete. The inclusion of required parameters (id, project_id) further clarifies the scope.

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 guidance on when to use the tool: to permanently delete Change Events. It emphasizes irreversibility, which helps the agent decide. However, it does not explicitly contrast with other delete tools (e.g., bulk delete) or specify when not to use it. The hint is strong enough for an agent to infer proper usage.

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