Delete Checklist Schedule Attachment

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true, so the description's emphasis on 'cannot be undone' and 'permanently removes' adds redundant but consistent context. However, it does not disclose other behavioral traits such as required permissions, error conditions, or side effects on related data. The description adds minimal value beyond annotations.

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, stating the same idea ('permanently delete', 'cannot be undone') multiple times. The list of required parameters is redundant given the schema. The structure is acceptable but contains unnecessary duplication, making it less concise than ideal.

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 simple delete attachment operation, the description covers the essential action and irreversibility. It includes API endpoint and module context ('Procore API: Project Management > Inspections'), which is helpful. However, it does not mention the return value or success/error responses, but since output schema is absent, this is acceptable. Overall adequate but not thorough.

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 covers all 3 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage), so the description does not need to add much. It redundantly lists required parameters and includes the endpoint URL, which shows path structure but does not provide semantic help beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 that the tool deletes an attachment from a checklist schedule. The verb 'delete' and resource 'Checklist Schedule Attachment' are specific, distinguishing it from sibling tools like delete_checklist_schedule (which deletes the schedule itself) and generic delete_attachment. However, the description confusingly refers to 'permanently delete the specified Inspections' instead of 'attachment', which slightly muddles the purpose.

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 says 'Use this to permanently delete the specified Inspections' but does not provide clear guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It fails to mention when not to use it, such as when the attachment is still needed, or what other tools could be used instead (e.g., bulk delete or reporting). Without contextual comparisons, the agent may misuse it.

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