delete_directory_line

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the action is irreversible and explains the consequence ('senders will no longer be able to send you invoices via this address'). It could mention authentication requirements, but for a simple delete, this is sufficient.

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 three sentences long, with no wasted words. It front-loads the purpose, then provides usage context, and ends with a critical warning. Every sentence adds value.

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 one-parameter delete tool with an output schema present, the description provides complete context: use cases, post-action guidance, and consequences of the irreversible action. It ties well to sibling tools and explains the impact on senders.

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% for the single parameter instance_id, which already describes its purpose and warning. The tool description does not add new semantic detail beyond restating the warning, 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 explicitly states 'Delete a directory line' and provides specific use cases: when changing Approved Platform or closing an establishment. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_directory_line and update_directory_line.

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?

It clearly states when to use the tool ('Use when changing Approved Platform or closing an establishment') and what to do after ('After deletion, create a new line via create_directory_line if needed'). It also includes a strong warning to verify the instance_id, guiding correct usage.

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