delete_object

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

The description discloses the destructive nature by using 'delete' and mentions the return value includes success/failure and a screenshot. However, it lacks details on side effects, permissions, or irreversibility, which is important given no annotations.

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 uses a structured Args/Returns format, which is adequate, but could be more concise. The key action is only stated in the first line, and the rest is somewhat verbose for a simple operation.

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 tool with two simple parameters and an output schema, the description covers the basics. However, it omits error conditions, prerequisites, and side effects, leaving room for improvement.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description adds meaningful context by explaining each parameter's role (document name and object name), compensating for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 tool deletes an object in FreeCAD, using a specific verb and resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'edit_object' or 'create_object', though the name itself is unambiguous.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of when not to use it or any prerequisites.

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