pumping_delete_pumping

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the most important consequence—deletion is permanent and irreversible—but does not mention permissions, side effects, or what happens to associated data. This is adequate but not rich.

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 no filler. It front-loads the primary verb and resource, and the permanence warning is an efficient, useful addition.

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 one-parameter delete tool with an output schema, the description plus schema are nearly sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly. It lacks optional context such as authorization requirements or cascading effects, but these are not essential for a simple 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with the single required `pumping_id` already documented as the ID of the pumping record to permanently delete. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 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 uses a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('pumping record'), clearly identifying the operation. It is distinct from sibling tools by the delete action, though it does not explicitly name or contrast with an alternative.

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 implies use when a pumping record needs to be removed, and the permanence warning hints that it is not appropriate if reversibility is needed. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this over update or mention alternatives.

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