drc_rule_delete

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

Annotations are empty, so the description carries the full burden. It does indicate the destructive nature via 'Delete' and scopes to the active rules file, but it does not disclose potential irreversibility, error handling for missing rules, or side effects on the design. This is minimal disclosure.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action and resource. It is concise with no filler, perfectly sized for a simple tool.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter and an output schema, so return values are likely covered. However, the description omits critical operational details such as whether deletion is permanent, how errors are handled, and whether the change is saved immediately. It is minimally viable but lacks deeper context.

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 schema has one parameter (rule_name) with no description (0% coverage). The tool description does not explain what constitutes a valid rule_name, how to obtain existing names, or any format constraints. It adds no semantic value over the schema's bare title.

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 specific action ('Delete'), the resource ('custom DRC rule'), and the scope ('from the active rules file'). It effectively distinguishes the tool from siblings like drc_rule_create and drc_rule_enable.

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 implies usage when a custom DRC rule is no longer needed, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this versus other DRC rule management tools, nor any prerequisites like the rule existing. It lacks clear context on when not to use it.

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