rm_delete_client_contact

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, but the description adds a crucial behavioral detail: confirm=True is required to execute the deletion. This goes beyond the schema default and tells the agent what additional step is necessary for the destructive side effect to occur.

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?

A single sentence conveys the action, the destructive nature, and the required confirmation flag. Every word earns its place, with the critical caveat front-loaded.

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 delete operation, this description plus the input schema and annotations is sufficient. The output schema exists, so return values are covered, and required parameters are declared in the schema. The only small gap is what happens when confirm=False, but the description's explicit 'requires confirm=True' mitigates that concern.

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%, and the description does not explain client_id or contact_id beyond what their names imply. It only addresses confirm's role. While the IDs are self-descriptive, the description does not compensate for the total lack of schema documentation on types, formats, or usage 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 states a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('client contact'), making the operation unambiguous. It also sets this apart from sibling tools like rm_create_client_contact and rm_list_client_contacts, so an agent can immediately identify it as the deletion operation.

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 conveys the core context—use this to delete a client contact—and highlights the requirement to pass confirm=True. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives (e.g., only use this when the contact should be permanently removed, not for updates), so the guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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