Eliminar estudio

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full transparency burden. It discloses that deletion is permanent and requires specific role and scope, which is sufficient behavioral context for a destructive operation.

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 sentences, minimal waste. The first sentence states the action, the second adds an important constraint. Perfectly front-loaded and concise.

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 no output schema, the description covers purpose, permanence, and access requirements. It could mention cascading effects (e.g., members, areas) but is complete enough for a single-param tool.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should explain the 'studioId' parameter, but it does not. The parameter is implied by the tool's purpose, but the description adds no explicit semantics beyond the schema.

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 verb 'Elimina' (delete) and the resource 'estudio' (studio), with 'definitivamente' (permanently) adding specificity. Among sibling tools like 'kairo_delete_studio_area', this uniquely targets the studio itself.

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 provides a prerequisite: 'Requiere rol de gestión y scope write', which guides access but does not specify when to use this tool over alternatives or indicate conditions to avoid using it.

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