delete_canvas

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of explaining side effects. It states the action (delete) but does not mention potential errors (e.g., if the canvas does not exist), irreversibility, or what happens to dependent resources. This is a minor gap for a simple delete operation.

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 a single, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It efficiently conveys the purpose without padding, making it easy for an agent to parse and act upon.

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 simple delete operation, the description is mostly complete. It does not specify the return value or error behavior, but given the tool's simplicity and the lack of an output schema, this is not a significant omission. It provides enough context for an agent to know what the tool does.

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 only parameter, canvas_id, is described in the schema as 'ID of the canvas to delete.' The tool description does not add any additional context beyond the schema. Since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 action (deletes) and the resource (a canvas from memory). It directly matches the tool name and leaves no ambiguity about what the tool does, distinguishing it from create, list, and other operations.

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 implies the tool is used when a canvas should be removed from memory. Since there are no alternative delete tools among the siblings, the usage context is unambiguous. No extra conditions are necessary for such a straightforward operation.

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