delete_linkedin_skill

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states that the skill is deleted but does not disclose whether the deletion is permanent or irreversible, whether profile-owner authorization is required, or what happens if the skill does not exist.

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. It is concise, though it achieves conciseness by omitting contextual details.

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 fully documented parameter, so the description covers the basic invocation. However, there is no output schema or annotation coverage, and the description omits destructive-operation caveats and any statement about return or error behavior.

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 coverage is 100% and the schema already describes skillId as 'The ID of the skill to delete'. The description adds no further meaning about where to obtain the skill ID or how it must be formatted.

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 uses a specific verb ('Delete'), resource ('skill'), and scope ('from your LinkedIn profile'), making the action unambiguous. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling deletion tools like delete_linkedin_language, but the resource name and phrasing distinguish it enough.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as add_linkedin_skill or delete_linkedin_language, and no prerequisites or exclusions. The intended usage is only implicit in the verb and resource.

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