openpanel_delete_chart

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While 'Remove' implies a destructive operation, the description fails to clarify if the chart is permanently deleted or merely detached from the dashboard, whether deletion cascades to associated data, or if there are rate limiting concerns.

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 brief and front-loaded, but the '[UNIFIED]' prefix appears to be metadata noise that consumes space without aiding comprehension. Given the lack of schema documentation and annotations, the description is actually undersized rather than appropriately concise.

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 requiring 4 specific identifier parameters with no schema descriptions and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It omits necessary context about the parameter hierarchy, authentication requirements, and the nature of the deletion (hard delete vs. soft delete).

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 input schema has 0% description coverage across all 4 required parameters (site, project_id, dashboard_id, chart_id). The description makes no mention of these parameters or their hierarchical relationship (site > project > dashboard > chart), leaving the agent without guidance on how to identify the target resource.

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 core action ('Remove') and resource ('chart from a dashboard'), providing specific verb and resource identification. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'openpanel_delete_dashboard', which could confuse agents about whether this deletes the chart entity or just removes it from a dashboard view.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'openpanel_update_chart' or 'openpanel_delete_dashboard'. It lacks prerequisites (e.g., whether the dashboard must exist) and does not indicate if this operation is reversible or permanent.

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