Delete Shopify Metafield

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is fully covered elsewhere. The description adds only the GID lookup prerequisite, not what deletion destroys, whether it cascades to variants/collections, or whether it can be undone.

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, zero waste, with the destructive action front-loaded and the prerequisite sequenced after it. Nothing redundant or padded.

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 single-parameter delete whose annotations already flag destructiveness and idempotency, and with no output schema to explain, the definition is close to sufficient. It still omits whether the deletion is permanent or recoverable, a meaningful gap for a destructive operation.

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 a single documented parameter ('Metafield GID'), so the schema carries the semantics. The description's 'by GID' merely echoes the schema rather than adding format examples or constraints, which is the baseline-3 case.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete a metafield') plus the identifier form ('by GID'), which distinguishes it from the sibling shopify_get_metafields and shopify_set_metafield without opening any schema.

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?

Explicitly tells the agent the prerequisite step ('Get the ID first with shopify_get_metafields'), which routes it to the right sibling before calling this tool. It does not state when-not-to-use or note irreversibility, so it falls short of full when/when-not coverage.

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