Delete Timesheet

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

The description consistently reinforces the destructiveHint annotation by stating 'This cannot be undone' and 'permanently removes'. It adds context beyond annotations by specifying required parameters and the API endpoint, though no contradictions are present.

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 structured with a clear flow: purpose, usage, warnings, and technical details. However, it contains slight repetition (e.g., 'permanently delete' twice), which could be tightened 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 no output schema, the description covers irreversibility, required parameters, and the API endpoint. While it does not detail the response, this is typical for delete endpoints and the context is sufficient for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the description adds minimal value beyond listing required parameters. It mentions 'project_id' and 'id' but does not elaborate on their semantics or usage beyond what the schema already 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 it deletes a timesheet for a specific project, using the verb 'Delete' and resource 'Timesheet'. It distinguishes itself from siblings by specifying 'Field Productivity' and the Procore API endpoint, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 indicates when to use it ('permanently delete') but does not provide explicit when-not-to-use guidance or mention alternative tools among the many sibling deletion tools. The usage is implied but lacks exclusions.

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