tracking_delete

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It adds useful context by clarifying that the operation does not affect the process, which distinguishes destructive intent. However, it doesn't state whether the deletion is permanent, what permissions are required, or what happens to related data.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the action and includes a clarification. It's concise and does not waste words, though it could be slightly more informative without becoming verbose.

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?

Given a mutation tool with no annotations, one parameter, and an output schema (which the description needn't explain), the description is minimally adequate. It covers the key behavioral trait of not touching the process, but lacks details on irreversibility, permissions, or side effects that would make it more 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%, with one required parameter (session_id). The description doesn't elaborate on the parameter at all, but with only one obvious parameter, the baseline of 3 seems appropriate. An agent can infer session_id is the identifier of the session to delete.

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 states a verb of sorts ("Supprime" implies delete) and the resource (une session / a tracking session). It distinguishes itself from tracking_kill by noting it doesn't touch the process, which helps against that sibling. However, it's terse and doesn't explicitly name what a "session" is in this context, leaving some ambiguity.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like tracking_stop, tracking_kill, or tracking_complete. The parenthetical hint suggests it's for deleting a session record without terminating the underlying process, but this is implied rather than stated as a use case.

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