Delete elements

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

Goes well beyond the destructiveHint annotation: irreversibility, the confirm gate, Archicad's silent-success quirk for out-of-window elements, the read-back verification step, and the enumerated refusal reasons all add real operational context an agent needs before calling.

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?

Front-loaded with the critical warning ('IRREVERSIBLE') and confirm requirement; dense but every clause carries information. The long middle sentence is run-on but not wasteful.

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?

Despite an existing output schema, the description explains the notable return fields (requested, deleted, not_deleted grouped by reason, active_window, stopped), so an agent understands both how to call it and how to interpret partial failures.

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%, so the description must carry semantics. It fully explains confirm's required value and clarifies that guids are filtered to those actually deletable, substantially compensating for the gap; only the port parameter is left unexplained.

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?

Starts with a specific verb+resource ('Delete elements') and immediately disambiguates from siblings like modify_elements/move_elements by scoping what actually gets deleted. An agent can tell exactly what this does from the first sentence.

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?

States the hard precondition (refuses without confirm=true) and explains the active-window scoping rule that determines when deletion will silently not apply. It doesn't name an explicit alternative tool, but the usage context is unambiguous.

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