Delete a holiday

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

The description simply restates the destructive nature already captured by the annotations (destructiveHint=true). It adds no new behavioral context such as permanence, confirmation requirements, or effects on related data. Given the annotation, the agent knows it's destructive, but the description doesn't enrich that understanding.

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 extremely short and does not add value beyond the title; it essentially paraphrases 'Delete a holiday.' While concise, it lacks substance and doesn't earn its place, though it is not as bad as a pure tautology.

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 three-parameter delete tool with two required parameters and a confirmation flag, the description is quite sparse. It doesn't mention the need for confirm=true or the optional workspace_id, though these are covered in the schema. The absence of an output schema and any return-value notes leaves the agent guessing, but the tool's simplicity mitigates the gap.

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 input schema has full descriptions for all three parameters, including the confirm requirement and workspace fallback. The description adds no parameter-specific information, so it does not improve on the schema. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since coverage is 100%.

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 'Removes a holiday' clearly states the action and resource, making it easy to identify as a delete operation. It distinguishes from sibling tools like clockify_list_holidays and clockify_create_holiday, so the purpose is unambiguous. However, it doesn't mention workspace-specific behavior, which is a minor gap.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as listing holidays first or handling confirmation. There is no mention of prerequisites like needing the holiday_id from list_holidays or that this is the only delete holiday endpoint. The usage is implied by the tool name but not explicitly stated.

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