delete_validation

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the action 'delete' without mentioning permanence, required permissions, potential cascading effects, or whether the operation is irreversible. This is a notable gap for a destructive action.

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 concise single sentence that immediately communicates the action and resource. No filler or redundant information; every word is meaningful.

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 absence of annotations and output schema, the description should offer more context for a destructive operation. It fails to address consequences like permanence or side effects, making it incomplete for an agent to fully understand the tool's impact.

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 fully describes the only parameter ('id' as 'Validation ID to delete'), providing 100% coverage. The description adds no extra semantic value beyond the schema, so it is adequate but not enhanced.

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 identifies the action ('Delete') and the resource ('a validation rule'), which is distinct from sibling delete tools targeting other entities. However, it provides no additional scope or context about what a validation rule is, so it doesn't fully earn a 5.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool, prerequisites (e.g., the rule must exist), or alternatives. It does not mention whether this is for removing invalid or obsolete rules, nor does it direct users to related tools like update_validation.

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