Delete Instances Customers By Id

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered structurally and the description does not contradict it. However, the description adds nothing beyond that: it does not say whether the delete is soft or hard, what happens to the customer's bank accounts/wallets/limits, or what an error on a missing ID looks like.

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 words contain no filler but also no information; this is under-specification rather than conciseness. There is nothing front-loaded because there is nothing to load.

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 destructive, open-world mutation with no output schema and undocumented required parameters, the description supplies none of the context an agent needs (scope, cascading effects, confirmation expectations). It is effectively a label, not a definition.

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 only 33% – only Idempotency-Key is documented in the schema, while id and instance_id carry only examples and length constraints. The description compensates for none of this, never mentioning the instance path parameter or the customer ID it operates on.

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?

"Delete Customer" restates the tool name and title almost verbatim, adding only the verb-object pairing. It does not state that the deletion is scoped to a specific instance/customer pair, nor distinguish it from the many sibling customer operations (PutV1InstancesCustomersById, GetV1InstancesCustomersById, DeleteV1InstancesCustomersBankAccountsById).

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 when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites, and no warnings about irreversibility for a destructive operation. The agent gets no help choosing between this and PutV1InstancesCustomersById or the various sub-resource delete tools.

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