delete_section

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

No annotations are provided, so the description fully bears the burden. It transparently details the deletion behavior for both include_children=True (deleting heading, body, and child sections) and False (promoting child sections). It also specifies the return value.

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 concise with three short paragraphs, front-loading the core action. Every sentence contributes useful information without repetition or fluff.

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 the three parameters and the include_children variation, the description adequately covers behavior and return value. An output schema exists, so not detailing return format further is acceptable. Could be improved by describing the 'ok' response structure, but not necessary.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains the include_children parameter's effect, but does not add meaning for file_path or path beyond their names. The schema already marks them as required, so the description adds moderate value.

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 tool deletes a section from a Markdown file, specifying the resource (section) and action (delete). It distinguishes from siblings like add_section and get_section by focusing on deletion behavior and parameters.

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 explains when to use include_children=True vs False, providing clear guidance on two common scenarios. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention prerequisites like file/section existence, which could be inferred but not stated.

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