delete_notification_destination

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The word 'Delete' indicates destructive intent, but the description does not disclose that deletion is likely permanent, whether it affects associated channels/workflows, or what happens when the destination does not exist. For a destructive tool, more behavioral context 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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states the action and the key identifying constraint efficiently, matching the simplicity of the tool.

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 simple one-parameter delete operation, the description plus schema is mostly enough to invoke it. However, with no annotations and no output schema, an agent is left unaware of success/error behavior and the possible downstream impacts of deleting a notification destination, so completeness is only adequate.

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 already fully documents the single parameter with 100% coverage. The description's 'by ID' merely reinforces destination_id rather than adding new meaning. This meets the baseline for schema-covered parameters but adds no extra semantic detail.

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 uses a specific verb ('Delete') and clearly identifies the resource ('notification destination') plus the identification mechanism ('by ID'). Among the many sibling tools, this uniquely and unambiguously matches its name and distinguishes it from create/list destination tools.

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?

Usage is implied rather than explicit: the agent can infer that this tool is for deleting a known notification destination, and could use list_notification_destinations to find an ID. However, there is no explicit guidance about when not to use it or mention of alternatives.

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