delete_stacks_api_url

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does usefully disclose the post-condition (the specific default endpoints that become active), but omits whether the custom value is destroyed or merely disabled, whether authentication/wallet state is required, and what happens if no custom URL was ever set.

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 core sentence is efficient and front-loaded, but the appended "Tip: call `earning_opportunities`..." is an off-topic promotional nudge unrelated to deleting an API URL and risks distracting an agent into an irrelevant call.

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 trivial zero-parameter configuration tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential effect and the resulting defaults. It still leaves gaps an agent may care about: behavior when no custom URL exists, whether further configuration is affected, and any confirmation/return signal.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. Nothing in the description conflicts with the empty schema, and the description correctly implies no input is needed.

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?

Specific verb plus resource ("Remove the custom Stacks API URL") and states the resulting state (revert to default Hiro API) with concrete hostnames. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like set_stacks_api_url, get_stacks_api_url, or delete_hiro_api_key, though the name and phrasing make the distinction inferable.

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 by the outcome ("revert to the default"), so an agent can infer this is the undo for a custom URL configuration. However, there are no explicit when-to-use/when-not conditions, no mention of prerequisites, and no reference to the sibling tools that set or read the URL.

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