measurements_delete_temperature

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states 'This action is permanent,' which is the key destructive trait. However, it does not mention how the API handles invalid IDs, whether there are cascading effects, or any authorization requirements. The permanence warning provides some transparency, but it is minimal.

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 two short sentences with zero waste. The action is stated first, followed by the crucial permanence warning. It is optimally sized for this simple tool.

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 tool's simplicity (one required parameter, schema fully documents it, output schema exists), the description is mostly complete. The permanence warning covers the main user concern. It lacks explicit mention of preconditions (e.g., the record must exist), but this is minor for a delete operation.

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 provides 100% coverage for the only parameter, temperature_id, with a clear description ('ID of the temperature record to permanently delete'). The tool description adds no further semantic value about the parameter, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 states a clear verb and resource: 'Delete a temperature record.' The resource 'temperature record' makes it easy to distinguish from sibling delete tools for other record types (e.g., delete_weight, delete_height). It could have been slightly more specific about it being a measurement record, but the name and context make that clear.

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 given about when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of when deletion is appropriate (e.g., correcting an erroneous entry, removing outdated data) or exclusions. The description relies entirely on the tool name to convey its use case.

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