ass_delete_lines

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and does reasonably well: it warns that None deletes every line ('use with care'), which is the key destructive-scope disclosure, and 'Snapshot-backed' signals the operation is undoable. It omits permission/auth requirements and what happens to the document state otherwise, keeping it out of the top tier.

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 action, then the critical selection caveat, then the return shape and snapshot note. No wasted sentences, though the inline backtick/JSON formatting is slightly heavy for the amount of content.

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?

An output schema exists, yet the description still restates the return shape, which is redundant but harmless. For a destructive tool with zero annotations and an undocumented doc_id parameter, it leaves gaps around which document is targeted and the exact undo semantics, so it is adequate rather than complete.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that 'selection' accepts any selection spelling and that None means all lines, which is genuinely useful, but the second parameter 'doc_id' (defaulting to null) is never explained in either the schema or the description.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete the selected lines'), which clearly separates it from siblings like ass_duplicate_lines, ass_merge_lines, or ass_move_lines. It does not explicitly name a sibling or contrast scope, so it stops short of full differentiation.

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?

Usage is implied by the verb, and the description adds one important conditional ('None means every line (use with care)'). However, it gives no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and never points to alternatives for recovering or undoing deletions.

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