dex_delete_custom_field

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: the action is 'permanently delete' (indicating irreversibility and mutation) and affects 'all contacts' (scope impact). However, it does not mention permissions, rate limits, or error conditions, leaving gaps for a destructive operation.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action ('permanently delete') and adds necessary detail about scope. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or fluff, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 and no output schema, the description is minimal but adequate. It covers the main action and impact, but lacks details on permissions, confirmation steps, or return values. Given the complexity of deletion, more behavioral context would improve completeness.

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 has 0% description coverage for its single parameter 'customFieldId', but the description compensates by clarifying that this parameter identifies the custom field to delete and that deletion removes values from contacts. This adds meaningful context beyond the bare schema, though it could specify format or source constraints.

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 specific action ('permanently delete') and resource ('a custom field'), and distinguishes it from siblings like 'dex_update_custom_field' or 'dex_list_custom_fields' by emphasizing irreversible removal. It adds context about the effect on contacts, which is not obvious from the name alone.

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 implies usage when a custom field needs to be removed entirely, but does not explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives like 'dex_update_custom_field' for modifications or warn against misuse. It provides basic context but lacks explicit guidance on prerequisites or exclusions.

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