delete_expense

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

There are no annotations to fall back on, and the description only states the action without disclosing behavioral traits such as permanence of deletion, return values, or error behavior. This is a minimal description for a mutating operation.

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 that directly states the operation and the key parameter. No filler or redundant information.

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 simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema), the description is sufficient to convey the core operation. However, it omits potential details about outcomes or side effects, which are not covered by annotations or schema. For a simple delete, this is marginally 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?

The schema already describes expense_id fully ('The ID of the expense to delete'), and the description's 'by its ID' adds no additional meaning. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline of 3 applies; no extra semantics are provided.

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 the specific verb 'Delete' with the object 'expense' and identifies the parameter 'by its ID,' clearly distinguishing this from sibling tools like add_expense, get_expenses, and get_summary. It says exactly what the tool does and on what resource.

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 offers no explicit guidance on when to use this tool rather than alternatives, nor any prerequisites or exclusions. The only hint is the verb 'Delete,' but no context about permissions, irreversibility, or when to choose this over sibling tools is provided.

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