Delete estimate

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and non-idempotent, but the description adds what annotations cannot: line items are destroyed, downstream records (projects, change orders, invoices) survive, and the deletion mirrors the UI's Delete menu item. It also states irreversibility in plain words.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the action and consequence, then the cascade scope, then the safer alternative. No filler.

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 destructive mutation with no output schema, everything an agent needs is present: what is destroyed, what is preserved, irreversibility, and the non-destructive alternative.

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% and the only parameter is documented as 'From list_estimates,' so the description need not repeat it. Baseline would be 3; the description earns a point for making clear the single identifier targets the estimate whose children are also deleted.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Deletes an estimate for good') and immediately disambiguates from sibling delete tools (delete_invoice, delete_change_order) by naming the exact object and its cascade semantics.

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?

Gives an explicit when-not with a named alternative: 'To keep the history, use update_estimate with status lost instead.' An agent has a clear decision rule between hard delete and status change.

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