fluig_dataset_delete

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden. It labels the action as destructive, which is good, but does not detail consequences (e.g., irreversible data loss, permission requirements, or server cleanup mechanism).

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?

Short and front-loaded with 'DESTRUCTIVE', but the second sentence is confusing and not clearly related to the tool's function. Could be more concise by removing or clarifying that sentence.

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?

Lacks details about what happens after deletion (e.g., success indication, side effects). The mention of server cleanup is vague and incomplete. No output schema exists, so description should provide more behavioral 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%; both parameters have descriptions in the schema. The tool description adds marginal value by specifying 'CUSTOM' dataset and implying confirm is mandatory, but does not provide new insight beyond the schema.

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?

Clearly states it deletes a CUSTOM dataset, distinguishing it from list, get, run, etc. The second sentence about server cleanup of throwaway datasets adds slight ambiguity but does not undermine the primary purpose.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., other dataset tools). The 'DESTRUCTIVE' prefix is a warning but not explicit usage context.

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