Delete transaction

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that apply mode is destructive and requires a confirmation token, which is key behavioral context. However, it does not explain what preview returns, whether deletions are reversible, or what side effects occur, leaving gaps for an agent.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. First sentence states the action and scope; second sentence adds a critical conditional requirement. Information is front-loaded and easy to parse.

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?

The tool has two modes and a token requirement, but no output schema and no annotations. The description covers the essentials but omits return values, how to obtain the confirmation token, and error behavior. For an agent to use it safely, more detail is needed.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning for confirmation_token by explaining it is required for apply mode, but does not explain how to obtain it. transaction_id and mode are left to be inferred from names and the enum, which is acceptable but not enriched.

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 a clear action ('preview or apply deletion') and specifies the resource ('one transaction'), which distinguishes it from batch siblings like preview_transaction_batch and apply_transaction_batch. The two modes are explicitly named, and the token requirement adds precision.

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 clearly implies this tool is for single-transaction deletions, and the two modes (preview vs apply) indicate when to use each. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives (e.g., using batch tools for multiple transactions) or provide exclusionary guidance, so it falls short of a 5.

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