pipedrive_leads_delete

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

Without annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It clearly indicates destructive behavior and introduces confirmation and dry-run safeguards, which is valuable beyond the input schema. However, it doesn't mention irreversibility, permissions, or side effects on related entities.

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 extremely concise with only two sentences, both front-loaded with the core purpose and key behavioral notes. Every word earns its place with no fluff.

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 tool deletes a lead (4 parameters, no output schema), the description covers the essential safety features but lacks details on return values, error handling, or what happens to related data. For a destructive action, more context would be beneficial.

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 description adds meaning beyond the schema for 'dry_run' by explicitly mentioning it, but does not clarify the 'reason' parameter. The schema already covers 'lead_id' and 'confirm'. With 50% schema description coverage, the description partially compensates but misses full parameter context.

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 clearly states 'Delete a lead', using the verb 'Delete' and resource 'lead', which exactly matches the tool name. It distinguishes this tool from other lead-related siblings (create, get, list, search, update) by the destructive action.

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 provides explicit usage guidance by noting the requirement for a 'confirm' parameter and the availability of 'dry_run'. This helps the agent understand the safety mechanism and testing capability. However, it doesn't explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives (e.g., mark as lost).

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