chaprola_delete_record

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the transparency burden. It discloses the soft-delete behavior (marks as .IGN) and the eventual physical removal on consolidation, which are critical behavioral traits. It does not cover error cases or permissions, but the added context exceeds typical descriptions.

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 two tightly written sentences with no filler. It front-loads the action and then adds the critical soft-delete detail, earning its place.

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 moderately complex delete operation, the description, combined with the schema, covers the essential aspects: what it deletes, how it identifies the record, and the soft-delete lifecycle. It does not explain return values, but no output schema is defined, and the 'single record' wording sufficiently handles the matching expectation.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for all three parameters, including the 'where' object semantics ('Field name → value pairs to identify exactly one record'). The description does not add further parameter-level detail, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Delete') and clearly states the resource ('a single record') and the mechanism ('matched by a where clause'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'update_record' and 'insert_record' by focusing on deletion, and from 'consolidate' by noting the soft-delete behavior.

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 clearly indicates this tool is for deleting one record identified by a where clause, which sets the usage context. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the 'single record' constraint and the where clause requirement provide enough guidance for an agent to choose it appropriately.

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