delete_linkedin_language

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 states that the operation is destructive but does not mention irreversibility, authorization requirements, or any side effects on the LinkedIn profile, which is minimal for a mutation tool.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word earns its place and the core action and target are immediately visible.

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 one-parameter delete operation, the schema plus description is largely sufficient to invoke the tool correctly. However, the lack of annotations and the absence of any note about permanence or permissions leaves minor but real gaps for an agent deciding whether deletion is appropriate.

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 100%, and the single parameter 'languageId' is already clearly described as 'The ID of the language to delete.' The tool description only adds profile context and does not need to restate what the schema already covers.

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 verb ('Delete') and a clear resource ('a language from your LinkedIn profile'). It is immediately distinguishable from sibling tools like add_linkedin_language and delete_linkedin_skill, which target different operations or resources.

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 context is clear: this tool removes a language from the user's profile, while add_linkedin_language handles adding one and other delete_* tools target other profile sections. It stops short of explicitly naming alternatives or saying when not to use it, but the resource-specific phrasing makes the intended use obvious.

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