delete_record

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the safety confirm requirement and read-only restriction, but does not explain permanence, side effects, or detailed return status beyond 'Status of the delete operation.' Has output schema present, which may compensate.

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 highly concise: a single sentence purpose followed by a structured Args/Returns list. Every sentence contributes meaningful information with no redundancy.

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 presence of an output schema and three parameters, the description covers the core action, safety mechanism, and read-only constraint. It lacks detail on return value semantics or error conditions, but is adequate for a delete operation.

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%, so the description is the sole source. For confirm, it adds 'Must be True to execute. This is a safety measure.' For file_name and record_id, only minimal repetition of schema titles. The added value is moderate.

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 'Delete a record from a Universe file,' specifying the verb (delete) and resource (record in a Universe file). It distinguishes this from sibling tools like write_record or read_record by the destructive action.

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 usage guidance by noting the confirm parameter as a safety measure and stating the tool is disabled in read-only mode. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools or specify when not to use it.

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