delete_assumption

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states that deletion occurs and returns a confirmation message, without covering permanence, cascading effects, permissions, or error behavior.

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 organized into short sections but includes an extraneous Args entry for 'ctx' and some repetition. It is still relatively concise and front-loaded with the core purpose.

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?

The description covers the basic delete functionality and batch mode, but lacks edge-case handling, confirmation details, and clarity on the relationship between 'id' and 'ids'. The erroneous 'ctx' parameter further reduces completeness.

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 description repeats schema information without adding meaningful detail, and incorrectly includes a 'ctx' parameter not present in the input schema, which could mislead an agent. It also omits the schema's note that 'ids' overrides 'id'.

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 tool deletes an assumption from the threat model, using a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes batch and single-item modes, differentiating it from sibling assumption tools.

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?

It provides explicit instructions for single-item and batch usage via the 'ids' parameter, which helps an agent decide how to invoke the tool. However, it does not mention alternatives or when-not-to-use cases.

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