Delete Delivery Log

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

The description provides significant context beyond the annotations: it states the deletion is permanent, cannot be undone, that a repeat call returns 404, and explains common failure modes (401, 403, 404) with error payload details. This adds valuable behavioral information beyond the destructiveHint and idempotentHint flags.

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 dense but mostly efficient, front-loaded with the action. It repeats the prerequisite ('Confirm the target id' and 'id must identify an existing parent record') and restates required parameters that are already in the schema, but overall it remains well-organized and not overly long.

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 and rich annotations, the description is exceptionally complete. It covers prerequisites, default behavior, irreversibility, error reporting, API reference, and even points to sibling tools for id resolution. Nothing important is missing.

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 coverage is 100%, but the description adds crucial semantics: project_id has a defaulting behavior via procore_set_config, and id must reference an existing parent record resolved via the list tool. This enriches the bare schema descriptions of 'unique identifier' parameters.

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 explicitly states 'Delete single Delivery Log' with a specific verb and resource, and provides the endpoint URL. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling delete tools like delete_equipment_log or delete_visitor_log.

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 gives clear context on when to use the tool: it instructs to confirm the target id with a matching show/list tool before calling and to resolve the id against an existing parent record. It also notes the project_id default from procore_set_config. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternative tools, but the prerequisites are well-stated.

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