delete-person

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden for behavioral disclosure. The phrase 'archives them in Float' adds some transparency by indicating the operation is not a hard delete. However, it does not mention permissions, side effects on associated data, or reversibility, which are important for a delete-like 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 extremely concise—a single sentence with a parenthetical clarification. Every word is informative, and the key action is front-loaded. There is no superfluous content.

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 simple delete tool with one parameter, the description is largely adequate. It states the action and the archival nature. However, it lacks any mention of consequences, such as irreversibility (though 'archive' implies some form of recovery) or what happens to linked data. Given no output schema, a bit more completeness would be helpful.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the parameter. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what the schema provides (the parameter description 'The person ID (people_id)' is already present). Therefore, baseline 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 the verb 'delete' and resource 'person', and clarifies that the operation archives the person in Float. This distinguishes it from other delete tools among siblings, as it's the only one targeting a person.

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 explicit guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like deactivate-account or other deletes. The usage is implied by the tool's name and resource, but there are no exclusions or context for when to prefer this over related operations.

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