delete_analysis

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly reveals that the operation removes multiple underlying artifacts (vectors, BM25 index, and JSON), signaling a destructive, irreversible action. It does not mention permissions or idempotency, but the core behavioral impact is well communicated.

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 focused sentence with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the parenthetical detail about what gets removed adds meaningful specificity without bloat.

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 one-parameter delete operation with no output schema, the description is reasonably complete: it states what is deleted and from where. It could add explicit usage guidance, but the low tool complexity means very little is missing for correct invocation.

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 for the undocumented ticket_id parameter. It does not explicitly state that ticket_id identifies the analysis record to delete, nor does it provide format or provenance details. The parameter meaning is only recoverable from the parameter name and title.

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 uses a specific verb ('Remove') with a clear resource ('analysis record') and explicitly states the scope of deletion: vectors, BM25 index, and JSON. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_analysis, update_analysis, and store_analysis without needing to open schemas.

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 is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as update_analysis or store_analysis. The description implies deletion by its wording, but it does not explicitly state when this is the right choice or when another sibling should be preferred.

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