delete_variable

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly indicates the action is permanent ('secara permanen') and warns that workflows referencing the variable may error. This is good transparency for a simple deletion 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 two concise sentences: the first states the core action, the second provides a critical warning. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose and contains no unnecessary words.

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 the tool's simplicity (single parameter, no annotations, output schema exists), the description covers the key aspects: action, permanence, and side effect. It could mention required permissions or the irreversibility, but the warning about workflows and 'permanently' is sufficient for most agents. The output schema covers return values.

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 already describes the parameter as 'ID variable yang ingin dihapus'. The tool description adds no further semantic detail beyond what the schema provides. With 100% schema coverage, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Hapus variable dari n8n secara permanen' (Delete variable from n8n permanently), specifying the verb (delete), resource (variable), and scope (permanent). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like delete_credential, delete_execution, etc., by focusing on variables.

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 a warning about workflows potentially erroring after deletion, but it does not give explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., deactivating or updating a variable). There is no mention of prerequisites or conditions for safe deletion.

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