Delete Asn

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

The description goes beyond the destructiveHint annotation by detailing the cascading deletion behavior, the irreversible nature, and the HTTP 204 response on success. It provides critical behavioral context that annotations alone do not convey.

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 concise yet comprehensive, using a clear structure: purpose, warning, cascading examples, user confirmation instruction, and return value. Every sentence adds necessary information without verbosity.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (single integer parameter, no output schema), the description covers all critical aspects: how to identify the ASN, the destructive nature, cascading effects, user confirmation requirement, and expected response. It is fully complete for an agent to safely use this tool.

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 already covers the parameter 'id' with type, minimum, and description. The description adds only a brief mention of 'numeric id', which is redundant. With 100% schema coverage, the description does not provide additional semantic value beyond what the schema offers.

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 verb 'delete', the specific resource 'asn', and the method 'by numeric id'. It is unambiguous and distinguishes this tool from sibling delete tools for other 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 description provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool: only after confirming the exact object and cascading effects with the user. It warns that the operation is destructive, irreversible, and cascades deletes, giving concrete examples. It also implicitly advises against use without confirmation.

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