Delete Equipment Model (Company)

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description redundantly states 'cannot be undone' and 'permanently removes', which aligns with annotations but adds little new information. It does include the API endpoint info, but no details about error handling or behavior beyond the obvious.

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 four sentences, but it repeats 'cannot be undone' twice unnecessarily. It is front-loaded with purpose but slightly padded. An acceptable length, not extremely concise.

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?

No output schema is provided, and the description does not explain return values on success or failure, error states, or authentication needs. For a deletion tool, this leaves the agent guessing about the response format. Missing essential context beyond the action itself.

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 covers 100% of parameters with clear descriptions (URL path parameters). The description merely restates that these are required, adding no additional meaning or context beyond what schema provides.

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 deletes an equipment model at the company level, using verb+resource. It distinguishes from project-level siblings by specifying 'Company' in title and text, and the repetitive 'cannot be undone' reinforces the irreversible nature.

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 when to use it (to delete equipment records) and notes it is permanent, but does not explicitly discuss when not to use it or compare with alternatives like delete_equipment_model (project) or delete_equipment_company. The minimum viable guidance is present via the permanent deletion warning.

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