delete_price_rule

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that a price rule is deleted, but does not disclose permanence, side effects on active discounts, or permission requirements. The verb 'delete' implies destruction, but lacks context.

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 a single, focused sentence with no filler words. It is appropriately sized for a simple delete operation and front-loads the key action and target.

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 destructive operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It lacks essential context about irreversibility, effects on related resources, or disclaimers about required permissions. A minimal viable description should at least hint at consequences or constraints.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage for the single 'id' parameter with a clear description ('Price Rule ID to delete'). The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning, but the schema fully documents the required input, meeting the baseline.

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 'Delete a price rule' uses a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('price rule'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like get_price_rule, create_price_rule, and update_price_rule. It is concise and 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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention preconditions, such as whether the price rule must be inactive or if deletion is preferable to disabling via update.

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