Delete DataLens key for embedding

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false, and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one genuine behavioral fact beyond that: a repeated delete returns 404, which corroborates the non-idempotent hint. It says nothing about required permissions or side effects on embeddings that use the key.

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?

Two very short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the one notable edge case. No filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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 single-parameter delete whose annotations already convey destructiveness and non-idempotency, the description is nearly sufficient. It could be more complete by noting whether dependent embeds break or whether special permissions are needed, but nothing required to invoke it correctly 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and there is a single parameter whose meaning is fully documented in the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no additional semantics about the embedding_secret_id beyond what the schema already states.

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 specific verb (Delete) and resource (a key for embedding), so the intent is unambiguous. It does not explicitly contrast itself with the sibling embeddingsecrets_get/list/create tools, but the name and phrasing make it distinguishable without opening a schema.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (get/list/create) or what prerequisites exist before deletion. The only routing-like information is the 404 note, which is a post-condition rather than usage guidance.

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