Delete Contact_role

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

While annotations already set destructiveHint=true, the description adds significant value by detailing cascade behavior with concrete examples, emphasizing irreversibility, and specifying HTTP 204 success response. No contradiction.

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?

Description is well-structured: begins with a clear action statement, then lists warnings and success info. It is reasonably concise for a destructive tool, though could be slightly shorter without losing clarity.

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 a simple tool with one parameter, no output schema, and annotations covering destructiveness, the description is complete: it identifies the object, explains cascading, requires user confirmation, and describes the response. No gaps.

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 covers the single required parameter 'id' with 100% coverage (type, minimum, description). Description does not add to parameter semantics beyond what schema provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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 states 'Delete a contact_role from NetBox by numeric id,' clearly specifying the action, resource, and input. It differentiates from sibling tools like get/create/update_contact_role by its verb and context.

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?

Explicit guidance: warns of destructive and irreversible nature, explains cascading deletes, and instructs to confirm object and cascade effects with user before calling. No alternatives mentioned but context is sufficient.

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