delete_manual_account

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

Annotations already provide destructiveHint=true. The description adds that both deletion options are irreversible, reinforcing the destructive nature. No additional behavioral details (e.g., permissions, side effects) are needed given the annotation.

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?

Two sentences convey purpose, optionality, and irreversibility with zero waste. The information is front-loaded and every word earns its place.

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 tool with no output schema and full schema coverage, the description is complete enough. It does not explain return values or error states, but the user can infer behavior from the annotations and schema. Adequate for the context.

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 100%, so the schema describes parameters fully. The description restates the optional effects (delete_items, delete_balance_history) but adds no new semantics beyond the schema, earning a baseline score of 3.

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 verb 'delete' and resource 'manually-managed account', distinguishing it from sibling delete tools targeting different resources (e.g., delete_category, delete_transaction). It specifies optional deletion of related items, leaving no ambiguity.

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 the optional parameters (delete_items, delete_balance_history) by naming the associated data. It does not explicitly exclude cases when not to use the tool, but the resource specificity makes usage clear.

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