delete_view

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds context by detailing that the view and its visual components are removed while underlying elements/relationships are preserved, which exceeds the annotation information.

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 concise and well-structured with labeled sections (Args, Returns, Errors). Every sentence adds value, and there is no unnecessary fluff. Could potentially be slightly shorter, but current length is justified.

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?

The description covers the main behavioral aspects: deletion scope, return value, and error condition. Given the presence of an output schema (implied by 'Success envelope'), the description is complete enough for an agent to understand the tool's effect.

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, so the description must compensate. The Args section describes view_id as 'ID of the view to delete', which adds basic meaning but no additional constraints or format details. This is adequate for a single string parameter.

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 'Delete an ArchiMate view from the active model' and specifies what is removed (view and visual nodes/connections) and what is NOT removed (underlying elements and relationships). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_element and delete_relationship.

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 for deleting views but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusion criteria. The context is clear from the tool name and sibling list, but no direct guidance is given.

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