delete_custom_field

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and does so well: it discloses that the operation is destructive, irreversible ('cannot be undone'), cascades to all values, and requires admin permissions. These are exactly the behavioral traits an agent needs before invoking a delete tool.

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 front-loaded and tightly structured: purpose first, then critical safety/permission warnings, then a parameter lookup hint. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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 one-parameter delete tool with an output schema available, the description covers purpose, destructive irreversibility, permission requirements, and parameter acquisition. Nothing essential is missing.

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 fully documents the single custom_field_id parameter, so the baseline would be 3. The description adds useful meaning beyond the schema by explaining how to find the ID via list_custom_fields and name matching, which improves invocation accuracy.

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 and resource: 'Delete a custom field and all its values.' It clearly distinguishes this operation from siblings like update_custom_field and create_custom_field by focusing on deletion, and the scope of deleting all values is made explicit.

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 clear context: 'Admin only' states a prerequisite, and 'To find custom_field_id: list_custom_fields → match by name' gives procedural guidance for obtaining the required parameter. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or name alternatives such as delete_custom_field_options for deleting only field options.

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