kaiten_delete_custom_property

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It successfully discloses that deletion is soft and highlights two blocking conditions, but it does not mention permissions, side effects, idempotency, or what happens on success or failure.

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 two short sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the second sentence provides valuable exclusion criteria that every word earns.

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 simple one-parameter delete operation, the description is largely complete: it states the action, the soft-delete behavior, and the key failure conditions. It does not describe return values, but the absence of an output schema and low operation complexity make this a minor gap.

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 covers the only parameter, property_id, with a clear description and type. The tool description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so it stays at the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 action ('Delete (soft)') and the resource ('a custom property'), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It is easily distinguished from the many sibling delete tools because it names the exact resource type and clarifies the deletion mode.

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 provides practical constraints on when the tool cannot be used: properties used as progress or attached to Service Desk services. This helps the agent avoid invalid calls, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state a broader 'use this when...' scenario.

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