spine_delete

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses cleanup side effects and that bone deletion without cascade is refused when children exist, but it omits irreversibility, permission requirements, and whether the operation is atomic.

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 front-loaded, tightly scoped, and structured with a clear Args section. Every sentence adds either behavioral or parameter-relevant information with no wasted prose.

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 six-parameter tool with no annotations and 0% schema description coverage, the description is only partially complete. Output schema exists so return values need not be explained, but missing name/project semantics, irreversibility, and sibling routing leave clear gaps.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains kind values and the slot, skin, and cascade conditions, but it leaves name and project undocumented, leaving two required parameters without added meaning.

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 states a specific delete operation and enumerates the resource kinds it handles, plus the cleanup of referring data. It is clear, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from specialized siblings like spine_delete_animation and spine_delete_keyframes, even though it can also delete animations.

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 conditional parameter requirements such as slot being required for kind="attachment" and cascade behavior for bones, but it does not say when to use this generic delete tool versus specialized siblings like spine_delete_animation. No prerequisites or exclusions are stated.

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