qui_delete_automation_activity

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

With destructiveHint=true, the annotation already flags destructive behavior, but the description adds no context about what specifically gets deleted (e.g., all activity for the instance or a single record), irreversibility, or side effects. It does not contradict annotations, but it misses the opportunity to clarify the scope of deletion.

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 concise and front-loaded, stating the endpoint in the first sentence and argument-passing convention in the second. No wasted 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?

For a destructive operation, the description lacks essential context about the deletion scope, required path variables, and consequences. While an output schema exists, it does not cover the operational behavior. The minimal detail is insufficient for an agent to use this tool confidently.

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 is a generic 'arguments' container with 0% description coverage, so the description's guidance on passing path variables directly, query values in arguments.params, and body in arguments.body adds some structure. However, it does not specify the expected instanceID path variable, query parameter names, or request body schema, leaving the agent to infer details.

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 identifies the tool as calling the DELETE /instances/{instanceID}/automations/activity endpoint, which distinguishes it from sibling list/get operations. However, it does not restate the purpose in plain language (e.g., 'Deletes automation activity for an instance'), relying on the endpoint path and tool name.

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 like qui_list_automation_activity or qui_get_automation_activity_run. It only explains how to call the endpoint, not the context or prerequisites for deletion.

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