script_projects_deployments_delete

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Delete a deployment' without elaborating on whether the operation is permanent, whether it can be undone, or any side effects on the Apps Script project. The verb 'Delete' hints at destruction, but no additional context is given about the consequences.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the action ('Delete') and resource. Every word earns its place, with no fluff or repetition of schema details.

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?

This is a simple deletion tool with two well-documented parameters, so the bar for completeness is lower. However, the description omits any caveats like 'This is irreversible' or 'Only works for inactive deployments.' While not severely incomplete, it leaves room for more behavioral context that would help an agent use it correctly.

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 100%, with both 'scriptId' and 'deploymentId' clearly described. The tool description itself adds no extra parameter meaning, but the schema already fully defines the parameters, so the baseline 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 'Delete a deployment of an Apps Script project' uses a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('deployment of an Apps Script project'). It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like script_projects_deployments_list, create, update, and get by indicating a destructive action.

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. It does not mention scenarios where deletion is appropriate, prerequisites, or warnings about using it instead of update or get. With many sibling tools, this lack of contextual guidance leaves the agent to infer usage purely from the tool name.

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