Delete Instances Customers Wallets 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. The description adds nothing beyond restating the mutation: it does not say whether the wallet must be empty, what state is destroyed, whether deletion is reversible, or what authorization is required for a destructive financial-resource 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?

"Remove Wallet" contains no wasted words and is front-loaded, but it is under-specified rather than concise. Two words cannot carry the operational context an agent needs for a destructive call.

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?

This is a destructive, idempotent delete on a financial resource with three required identifiers and no output schema. The description should at least confirm the deletion target/scope and consequences; instead it offers two words, leaving a substantial gap.

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 coverage is only 50% (customer_id and Idempotency-Key are described; id and instance_id have examples but no description), so the description needs to compensate, and it does not. "Remove Wallet" gives no hint that three identifiers (instance, customer, wallet id) are required or what they identify.

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?

"Remove Wallet" names a verb and resource, but it is the bare minimum and does not distinguish this tool from sibling deletes such as DeleteV1InstancesCustomersBlockchainWalletsById or DeleteV1InstancesCustomersBankAccountsById. An agent must rely almost entirely on the tool name to understand which wallet is being removed and in what scope.

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 guidance on when to use this delete versus the wallet-related siblings (blockchain wallets, bank accounts offramp wallets) or versus GetV1InstancesCustomersWallets/Put operations. No prerequisites, no exclusions, no stated alternatives.

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