delete_rich_media_ad_item

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 only states the action 'delete' without disclosing side effects, irreversibility, required permissions, or behavior on non-existent IDs. This is a significant gap for a mutation tool, as the agent has no information about the consequences or conditions of the operation.

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 one short sentence with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity (single parameter, clear action). The information is front-loaded and immediately understandable. This is a model of conciseness, though it trades off richness for brevity.

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?

For a delete tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too minimal to be considered contextually complete. It fails to provide any guidance on usage conditions, side effects, or how it fits with sibling tools. The agent lacks crucial context to safely invoke this destructive operation, such as knowing whether deletion is permanent or if there are dependencies that block deletion.

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 input schema has 100% coverage—the single parameter 'id' is described as 'Ad item ID'. The tool description adds no parameter-level semantics beyond this. Since the schema fully documents the parameter, the baseline of 3 is appropriate; no additional credit is given for redundant information.

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 'Delete a rich media ad item' is a direct restatement of the tool name. It provides no additional information beyond the name itself, making it tautological. While it does specify the resource type (rich media ad item), which distinguishes it from sibling delete tools for other ad item types, the description does not add anything beyond what the name already conveys.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any prerequisites, contexts, or exclusions. With many sibling tools for deleting other ad item types (e.g., delete_image_ad_item, delete_native_ad_item), the lack of even a minimal note such as 'for other ad item types, use the respective delete tool' leaves the agent without explicit usage direction.

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