Delete Project Currency Configuration

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

The description emphasizes that the action 'cannot be undone' and 'permanently removes', adding context beyond the annotations (destructiveHint: true). It also includes API endpoint details. However, it is somewhat redundant by stating permanence twice.

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 5 sentences, but contains repetition: 'permanently delete' and 'This cannot be undone' each appear twice. It includes endpoint info which may be useful but adds length. Could be trimmed to 2-3 concise sentences.

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 clear annotations (destructive, idempotent, openWorld), the description provides sufficient context: permanence, required parameters, and API endpoint. It lacks details like response behavior or error cases, but these are less critical for a delete endpoint.

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?

All parameters are already well-described in the input schema (company_id, project_id with full descriptions). The description adds no new parameter meaning beyond restating them in the endpoint path, so baseline 3 applies.

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 specifies the action 'delete' and the resource 'project currency configuration', and provides the identifiers (company_id, project_id). It distinguishes the tool from siblings like 'create_project_currency_configuration' and 'update_project_currency_configuration' by focusing on deletion, though it does not explicitly differentiate from other deletion tools.

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 only states to 'use this to permanently delete' but lacks guidance on when to choose this over alternatives (e.g., soft delete, deactivation). It does not mention prerequisites, conditions, or scenarios where deletion is inappropriate.

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