delete

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries the full burden. It states the destructive action ('Deletes') but does not disclose irreversibility, side effects on dependent objects, or the fact that wildcards and 'all' can mass-delete. The name and schema hint at these behaviors, but the description itself adds little beyond the verb.

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, appropriately sized sentence: 'Deletes objects or selections.' It is front-loaded with the verb and object, contains no filler, and is suitably concise for a tool with one parameter.

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 simple one-parameter tool with a rich schema and an output schema, the description provides the basic invocation context. However, as a destructive tool with no annotations, it would benefit from clarifying permanence and differentiating from sibling tools like 'remove', so the description is minimally complete but not fully self-sufficient.

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 coverage is 100%: the 'name' parameter is fully described with wildcard examples and the special 'all' value. The description adds no extra parameter context, but the schema already provides the necessary details, matching the baseline for high coverage.

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 uses a specific verb ('Deletes') and identifies the resource ('objects or selections'), making the core purpose clear. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from similar sibling tools like 'remove' or 'deselect', but the meaning is unambiguous.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'remove', 'deselect', or 'hide'. There are no exclusions, prerequisites, or preference hints, leaving the agent without context for tool selection.

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