keyso_delete_wordstat_delete_words

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses the HTTP method DELETE and the endpoint, which indicates a destructive operation, but it does not state what is actually deleted, whether the action is irreversible, or what authentication/payload requirements exist. For a delete operation, this is insufficient.

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 very short and front-loads the intended action before giving method, path, and an example URL. It contains no wasted words and is easy to scan. However, the brevity comes at the cost of omitting behavioral and payload details, so it is efficient rather than well-rounded.

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?

There is no output schema and no annotations, and the main body parameter is left unspecified, so an agent cannot know what payload to send. The example URL confirms the endpoint but not the required request body, authentication context, or response behavior. This is inadequate for a destructive operation.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3; token and base_url are adequately described as overrides in the schema. However, the main body parameter has an empty object schema with only 'JSON body', and the description does not explain what the body must contain (e.g., word IDs or project context). The description adds no parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 contains 'удаление слов' (delete words), naming the action and the Wordstat resource, and the path makes it clear this targets /wordstat/delete-words. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like keyso_delete_wordstat_delete_project or keyso_post_wordstat_id_update_words, so it stops short of full differentiation. Clear overall, but not sibling-aware.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling Wordstat tools, and no exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned. The example request shows how to call the endpoint, but not when it should be chosen over alternatives. This is effectively no usage guidance.

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