Delete Cost Item

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description reinforces irreversibility ('cannot be undone') and provides the API endpoint. However, it does not disclose return values (e.g., 204 No Content) or error scenarios.

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 but contains minor redundancy (states 'cannot be undone' twice). Front-loads key information. Could be slightly shorter without losing clarity.

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 operation with two parameters, the description covers purpose, irreversibility, and required inputs. However, it omits the response structure (e.g., empty body with 204 status) and any authentication or permission requirements, making it incomplete for a mutation tool.

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 required parameters. The description simply restates them as 'Required parameters: item_id, company_id' without adding semantic details 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 that the tool permanently deletes Cost Catalog records and lists required parameters. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling tool 'delete_cost_items' (plural), which likely handles bulk deletion.

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 implies usage for deleting a single cost item by specifying required parameters. It provides no guidance on when not to use this tool, prerequisites, or alternative tools (e.g., bulk delete).

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