Delete received document (expense)

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds 'Permanently delete' and 'Irreversible,' reinforcing the permanent nature and explicitly stating no undo capability, which adds value beyond the annotations. It does not contradict annotations.

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 sentence with no fluff. It immediately conveys the action and consequence ('Irreversible'), making it easy to parse.

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 two well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description is adequate. It mentions permanence and irreversibility. However, it could briefly note side effects (e.g., if attachments are deleted) or mention that it works only for received documents, but this is minor.

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%: both 'company_id' and 'document_id' are described in the schema. The description does not add additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline 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 action: 'Permanently delete a received document by ID.' It specifies the verb, resource type, and uniqueness (received document vs issued document), distinguishing it from sibling tools like delete_issued_document.

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?

Usage is implied by the tool name and description (to delete a received document), but there is no explicit guidance on when to choose this over alternatives, such as delete_issued_document or update_received_document. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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