chaprola_schedule_delete

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the action 'delete' without disclosing whether the deletion is permanent, irreversible, or has side effects. It also does not mention error handling or permissions. This is a significant gap for a destructive operation.

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, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource. It contains no filler or redundant information beyond what is necessary, making it easy to parse.

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?

Given the simplicity of the tool (one required param, no output schema), the description is somewhat complete but lacks behavioral context such as permanence or error conditions. For a destructive mutation tool with no annotations, more detail would be expected, but the minimal scope keeps it from being severely deficient.

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% coverage: the 'name' parameter is described as 'Name of the schedule to delete'. The description's 'by name' simply echoes this, adding no additional meaning. The schema already carries the semantic weight, so a 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 "Delete a scheduled job by name" uses a specific verb (delete) and resource (scheduled job), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like chaprola_schedule_list (list) and chaprola_schedule (create/update). The inclusion of 'by name' also identifies the key parameter.

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: use this tool when you need to delete a scheduled job by its name. However, it provides no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. It is adequate but minimal.

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