Delete Company Segment Item

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

Annotations already indicate destructive and non-read-only behavior, but the description adds substantial context: permanent removal, irreversibility, 404 on repeat calls, and detailed error semantics (401/403/404). It also explains the company_id default behavior. This goes well beyond what annotations provide.

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 well-organized: purpose, prerequisites, consequences, error handling, required params, and API reference. Every sentence contributes useful information without redundancy or fluff.

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 destructive nature and hierarchical resource requirements, the description covers prerequisites, irreversibility, error modes, and the exact API endpoint. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to use the tool safely and correctly, even without an output schema.

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 schema already covers all three parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description adds value by explaining that company_id defaults to the configured company when omitted, and that segment_id and id must identify existing parent records. This enriches the schema semantics, though not exhaustively.

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 specific Company Segment Item', which uses a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from bulk delete or update siblings. It consistently focuses on the exact resource being deleted.

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 explicitly instructs to confirm the target id with the matching show or list tool before calling, and to resolve segment_id and id via the matching list tool first. It also notes the company_id default from procore_set_config. However, it does not explicitly mention alternative tools (e.g., bulk delete) for cases where multiple deletions are needed, so it falls short of a 5.

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