Delete Standard Cost Code

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

Annotations already provide destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds 'This cannot be undone' and 'Permanently removes,' which align with destructiveHint but do not add new behavioral context beyond what annotations convey. No additional traits like rate limits or auth needs are disclosed.

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 verbose and contains redundant statements like 'This cannot be undone' repeated twice. It includes endpoint details and API documentation references that are not essential for tool selection. A more concise version would improve usability.

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 tool's simplicity (2 params, no output schema) and existing annotations, the description covers the basic action and required parameters but lacks usage guidance and additional behavioral context. It includes a deprecation note, which adds some value but does not make it fully complete.

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% description coverage for both parameters (id and company_id). The description only repeats that they are required, adding no new meaning. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already carries the burden.

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 verb 'Delete' and the resource 'Standard Cost Code for ERP integrated companies and standard cost code lists.' It also specifies the action on 'Work Breakdown Structure records.' While the deprecation note adds some noise, the purpose is clear and distinct from siblings due to the specific resource name.

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 lists required parameters but offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like other delete tools or the replacement endpoint. The deprecation note hints at not using it but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use context.

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