Delete client

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint: true, but the description adds the key detail that deletion is 'Irreversible,' which goes beyond the generic destructive hint. This communicates a permanent, non-recoverable action. No contradictions with 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 two short sentences: the first states the action and method, the second warns of irreversibility. Every word earns its place, with no redundant phrasing. Excellent front-loading.

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 tool with one parameter and annotations covering destructive behavior, the description sufficiently covers what, how, and consequence. No output schema exists, so return values are not expected to be described. It is complete for the tool's complexity.

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 has only one parameter, uuid, with no description (0% coverage). The description's 'by uuid' clarifies that the parameter is the identifier of the client to delete, which adds meaning beyond the schema. However, it does not specify the expected format or how to obtain the uuid, leaving some ambiguity for a 0% coverage case.

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 ('Delete'), the resource ('client'), and the method ('by uuid'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_client, create_client, and update_client, each of which has a different operation. The irreversibility warning reinforces the destructive nature, making the purpose unmistakable.

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 usage context: delete a client when you need to permanently remove it. It does not explicitly list alternatives or exclusions, but the 'Irreversible' warning cautions against casual use. For a delete tool, the context is clear enough that a 4 is appropriate.

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