storyline_delete_line_item

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It does a good job by noting 'Permanently remove' (irreversibility) and the need for confirm: true to proceed (a non-obvious interactive step). However, it does not discuss potential side effects, permissions, or cascade behaviors beyond these core points.

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 sentences: the first states purpose, the second gives the essential instruction for proceeding. No redundant words or filler; every phrase earns its place.

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?

Given the tool is a destructive deletion with a confirmation mechanism, the description covers the critical aspects: what is removed (line item), from where (storyline's strategy), permanence, and the required confirm flag. It is complete enough for an agent to understand the operation, especially since no output schema exists and the resource scope is clear.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds limited parameter context, mainly restating that confirm must be true (already described in schema). It does not clarify the semantics of itemId or storylineId beyond what the schema already provides.

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 tool's function with a specific verb ('permanently remove') and resource ('a line item from a storyline's strategy'). It convincingly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like storyline_delete (which removes the entire storyline) and storyline_update_line_item (which modifies rather than deletes).

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 through its purpose and the instruction to pass confirm: true, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusion criteria. There is no mention of when not to use it or a direct comparison to related storyline operations.

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