kaiten_delete_sd_sla

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

There are no annotations, so the description itself must communicate what happens when the tool is called. It only restates the delete action and gives no information about irreversibility, permissions, cascading effects, or whether attached records are affected. This is a meaningful gap for a destructive operation.

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. For a one-parameter delete tool, this is appropriately concise, though it could have used the available space to mention behavioral consequences.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient for an agent to identify the action and find the required ID. It is not complete for a destructive action because it omits side effects, reversibility, and permission requirements, but the low complexity keeps the gap from being severe.

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 input schema already fully documents the single required parameter, sla_id, as a UUID string with 100% description coverage. The tool description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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') and a concrete resource ('Service Desk SLA policy'), so the action is unmistakable. It also expands the abbreviated tool name into a more readable object. It does not explicitly differentiate from kaiten_delete_sla_rule, but the resource naming is enough to distinguish it from most deletion siblings.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool rather than related deletion tools, nor are any prerequisites, consequences, or alternatives mentioned. An agent is left to infer that this deletes an SD SLA policy and has no help deciding between it and kaiten_delete_sla_rule or other delete tools.

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