directus_delete_panel

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Delete' without clarifying if this is a hard delete, soft delete, or if it triggers cascading effects. Lacks disclosure of permission requirements or return value structure.

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?

Extremely brief (one sentence), but begins with a metadata tag '[UNIFIED]' that wastes tokens without aiding comprehension. Otherwise efficient, though front-loading could better prioritize the action over metadata.

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 operation with zero schema descriptions and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It fails to document the relationship between the `site` parameter and the panel deletion, or whether the operation returns confirmation data.

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 coverage is 0% with no parameter descriptions. The description mentions 'panel' and 'dashboard' providing domain context, but fails to explicitly map these concepts to the actual parameters (`site` and `id`), leaving ambiguity about which ID is required (panel vs dashboard). Adds marginal value but insufficient compensation 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 the specific action (Delete) and resource (panel) with clear scope (from a dashboard). The '[UNIFIED]' prefix is noise, but the core statement effectively distinguishes this from sibling `directus_delete_dashboard` by specifying the sub-resource level operation.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this versus alternatives, no prerequisites (e.g., requiring dashboard existence), and no warning about irreversibility. The agent must infer usage context solely from the tool name.

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