client_delete

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

No annotations exist, and the description gives no details about behavioral traits such as irreversibility, authorization requirements, cascading effects on related data (e.g., invoices, transactions), or response behavior. For a destructive operation, this is insufficient.

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 concise sentence with no unnecessary words or redundancy. It is front-loaded and to the point.

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 one-parameter delete tool, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks any mention of return value, confirmation behavior, or side effects. With no output schema, the agent might benefit from more context about the deletion process.

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 description adds no information beyond the input schema. The schema already provides a clear description for the 'id' parameter (Client ID (UUID)). With 100% schema coverage, baseline 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 'Delete a client' clearly states the action and the resource, using a specific verb and noun. It readily distinguishes from sibling tools like client_create, client_list, client_show, and client_update.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like client_update or client_disable. The description does not mention prerequisites, safety checks, or situations where deletion is inappropriate.

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