Удалить уточнения

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the destructive nature is conveyed. The description does not contradict this but adds no additional behavioral context such as permanence, side effects, or required permissions. Given the annotations, the minimalism is acceptable but not enhancing.

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, clear sentence with no wasted words. The action is front-loaded directly, making it easy to scan and understand.

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 operation with a single array parameter, the description and annotations are adequate. It does not describe the response or error handling, but given the low complexity and lack of output schema, this is a minor gap. An agent can invoke the tool correctly with the information provided.

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 covers 100% of the parameter with a description for 'ids' (Id уточнений, которые нужно удалить). The description does not add further meaning beyond what the schema provides. The baseline of 3 applies since the schema is sufficient.

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 'deletes' and the resource 'callouts' (уточнения), specifying deletion by id and referencing the API endpoint. This unambiguously distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_vcards or delete_sitelinks.

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 conditions, prerequisites, or contrast with other delete operations. An agent has no information about when this is the appropriate choice among many similar tools.

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