coda_delete_row

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

The description only states 'delete', implying a destructive action, but does not disclose important behavioral traits such as permanence of deletion, cascading effects, required permissions, or whether the action is reversible. With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden but fails to adequately inform the agent of these risks.

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 a single sentence and avoids unnecessary verbiage. However, it is overly minimal; while concise, it could include more relevant information (e.g., that deletion is permanent, or a note about row ID versus name) without becoming verbose. It earns a 3 for being succinct but lacking depth.

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's complexity (3 required parameters, no annotations, no output schema), the description should provide enough context for correct invocation. It fails to cover behavioral aspects, parameter usage, or when to use it compared to siblings. The description is incomplete for an agent to make a safe and correct decision.

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 0%, meaning the schema provides only generic descriptions (e.g., 'ID of the doc'). The tool description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond what is already in the schema. For a tool with three required parameters, the description should elaborate on what values each parameter accepts (e.g., format of IDs, whether names are case-sensitive), but it does not.

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 'Delete a specific row from a table' clearly states the verb (delete), resource (row), and context (from a table). It distinguishes from siblings like coda_delete_rows (batch delete) and coda_delete_page (page resource), making it unambiguous.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, the sibling tool coda_delete_rows exists for deleting multiple rows, but there is no mention of when to choose one over the other. The description lacks any context for appropriate usage.

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