Delete a job type

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

The annotations already indicate destructive and idempotent behavior, so the bar is lower. The description adds meaningful context beyond the annotations: the deletion is soft, and system rows are protected from deletion. No contradiction with the annotations.

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?

Two brief sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and followed by a key behavioral constraint. Every sentence earns its place with no unnecessary text.

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 simple one-parameter delete operation with strong annotations, the description is mostly complete. It covers the essential soft-delete behavior and the system-row restriction, though it does not mention what happens if a system-row ID is passed or describe the response.

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%, with the single 'id' parameter already documented as 'Job Type ID'. The description adds no new parameter-level details, but it does contextualize the parameter by noting that system rows cannot be deleted, which is useful but not required for the parameter itself.

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 the specific operation (delete) and resource (job type), and adds the important distinction that it is a soft delete. The resource is clearly named, so an agent can distinguish it from the many other delete* sibling tools.

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: call this when you need to delete a non-system job type. It also provides one exclusion, stating that system rows cannot be deleted, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or describe when a different tool should be used.

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