delete_module

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

Annotations already indicate destructive behavior (destructiveHint=true), and the description merely restates 'Delete'. With annotations present, the description adds no new behavioral context (e.g., whether deletion is irreversible, cascades, or requires permissions). Thus, it provides minimal added value.

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 extremely concise at three words, with no redundant or irrelevant information. Every word is meaningful, and the structure is front-loaded with the primary action.

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 simplicity of the tool (delete operation with one required parameter), the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks details on return value, side effects, or error conditions. With no output schema, more contextual information would be beneficial for complete understanding.

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%, and both parameters have clear descriptions (model_id optional with default, module_name required). The tool description adds no further meaning, so it meets the baseline without enhancement.

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 the action ('delete') and the resource ('module'), matching the tool's name and distinguishing it from siblings like 'create_module' or 'rename_module'. However, it does not elaborate on scope or effects, which slightly limits clarity.

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 such as 'remove_from_module'. The description offers no context about prerequisites, side effects, or appropriate scenarios, leaving the agent to infer usage.

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