delete_model

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, but the description adds important nuance: it only removes from the current session, not from saved .stmx files, and deliberately requires model_id (no implicit 'current model'). This goes beyond the annotation to clarify the exact scope and safety profile, which is valuable for a destructive tool.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action ('Remove a model'), and every clause adds value: scope, safety, and requirement. There is no fluff or repetition.

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 simple deletion tool with full schema coverage, annotations, and an output schema, the description is sufficiently complete. It covers the essential aspects: what is removed, what is not touched, and the required parameter behavior, leaving no significant gaps.

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 100%, with both model_id and workspace_id adequately described. The description adds minimal parameter-level information beyond emphasizing that model_id is required and there is no implicit fallback. This slightly reinforces the schema but does not significantly enhance meaning.

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 'Remove' with a clear resource ('a model from the current session'), and further distinguishes itself by noting that saved .stmx files are untouched and that there is no implicit 'delete current model'. This clearly sets it apart from sibling tools like delete_variable or delete_module.

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 clear context: it removes a session model only, does not affect saved files, and requires an explicit model_id. While it does not explicitly name alternative tools for other deletion tasks, the behavior and constraints are unambiguous enough for an agent to decide when to call it.

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