delete_helper

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose an important side effect — the domain is reloaded after deletion. However, it omits whether the helper must be unused, whether deletion is reversible, what permissions are required, and what happens on failure.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no waste — action, target, and side effect in one pass. It is appropriately sized, though it leans on brevity at the cost of completeness.

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 destructive, zero-annotation tool with undocumented required parameters and no output schema, the description is thin. It covers the action and one side effect but leaves permissions, preconditions, and parameter meaning unaddressed.

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% and both required parameters (domain, helper_id) have no descriptions. The description mentions 'helper' and 'domain' only implicitly, adding no format, ID conventions, or lookup semantics to compensate for the schema gap.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete a helper') plus a side effect ('reload the domain'), which distinguishes it from upsert_helper/list_helpers/get_helper in the sibling set. It is clear, though it does not explicitly name which siblings it is not.

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 versus upsert_helper or delete_template_entity/delete_history_stats_sensor, and no prerequisites or exclusions. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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