delete_case

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions that soft=True previews without applying, but does not describe what happens when soft=False (actual deletion), whether it is irreversible, or any side effects. For a destructive operation, more disclosure is needed.

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 a single concise sentence that front-loads the action and includes a key parameter detail. No unnecessary words, making it efficient for agent parsing.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and two parameters, the description covers the basic operation but misses critical context: return value, error handling, permission requirements, and the irreversible nature of deletion. This incompleteness warrants a 2.

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 has 2 parameters with 0% description coverage. The description adds meaning for 'soft' by explaining its preview function, but provides no additional context for 'case_id' beyond its name. This partial compensation earns a 3.

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 action ('Delete a test case') and the resource ('test case'). It also introduces the soft delete option, making the purpose specific. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like update_case or add_case, so a 4 is appropriate.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_case or list_cases. There is no mention of prerequisites, constraints, or context in which deletion is appropriate. The description only explains the soft parameter, not when to use the tool.

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