delete_reminder

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does disclose the key trait that deletion is destructive and requires explicit confirmation, which is meaningful context. It stops short of stating irreversibility, what happens when confirm is absent/false, permission requirements, or the response shape.

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 with no filler, and the destructive action is front-loaded before the confirmation requirement. Slightly under-specified rather than padded, but structurally efficient.

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 destructive tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter coverage, the description should identify the target identifier and the failure/irreversibility semantics. It covers only the confirmation requirement, so an agent still lacks enough to call it confidently in edge cases.

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% for two required parameters, so the description must compensate and it largely does not. It hints at the `confirm` parameter through the confirmation sentence but never explains what `id` refers to (a reminder identifier) or its expected format, leaving half the surface undocumented in both places.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Удалить напоминание' / delete a reminder), which maps unambiguously onto the reminder family of siblings (list_reminders, create_reminder, update_reminder). It does not explicitly name how it differs from update_reminder or delete_transaction, but the verb+resource pairing is clear enough for an agent to select it.

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?

'Нужно явно подтвердить удаление' gives one concrete prerequisite (explicit confirmation) for invoking the tool. However, there is no guidance on when to prefer this over update_reminder (e.g., to modify rather than remove) or on what to do if the user has not yet confirmed, so usage is only implied.

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