delete_avatar

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It states 'Delete' (destructive) and 'Cannot delete stock avatars', but lacks details on side effects (e.g., impact on meetings), permissions, or reversibility. This is minimal disclosure for a mutation tool.

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 concise with two front-loaded sentences and a clear Args section. Every word adds value, and no extraneous information is present.

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 tool with one required parameter, the description covers core purpose and constraints. However, it lacks return value details (though an output schema exists), permissions, and error handling information. Minimal but adequate.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds 'The UUID of the avatar to delete' for the avatar_id parameter. This provides type (UUID) and context, but omits where to obtain the ID or format requirements. It is helpful but not highly detailed.

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 clearly states 'Delete a custom avatar by ID' which specifies the verb (delete) and resource (custom avatar), and distinguishes from sibling tools like update_avatar or create_avatar. The added constraint 'Cannot delete stock avatars' further clarifies the tool's scope.

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 explicitly says 'Cannot delete stock avatars', indicating when not to use the tool. While it does not mention alternative tools for deletion (since there is no sibling delete avatar tool), the negative condition provides clear usage guidance.

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