delete_scheduling_page

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds the critical context that the operation 'Cannot be undone.' This goes beyond the annotation by specifying irreversibility, a meaningful behavioral disclosure. No contradiction exists.

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 short sentences deliver both the purpose and a key safety warning with zero filler. Every word earns its place, and the critical information is front-loaded.

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 tool with a single parameter and an output schema, the description sufficiently covers purpose, irreversibility, and identifier provenance. It does not mention potential failure conditions or cascading effects, but given the tool's simplicity and annotations, this is adequate.

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?

The schema only defines page_id as an integer with no additional description. The description compensates by specifying its source ('from list_scheduling_pages'), which gives the agent actionable guidance on where to obtain a valid identifier. This adds value beyond the bare 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 uses a specific verb ('Delete') and names the resource ('scheduling page'), making the action unambiguous. It also includes the only identifier needed, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_scheduling_pages, create_scheduling_page, or update_scheduling_page.

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 explicitly directs the agent to use 'page_id from list_scheduling_pages', which implies a prerequisite workflow and distinguishes this from other delete tools. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but for a targeted delete operation, this is sufficient guidance.

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