Delete a vehicle

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

The description discloses that the operation is a soft delete, adding nuance beyond the annotations' destructiveHint and idempotentHint. It clarifies that the vehicle is not permanently purged, though it does not explain the observable consequences such as visibility in list calls or restoration behavior.

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 short and the key detail 'soft deletes' is present, but the first line 'Delete a vehicle' is redundant with the title. Apart from that minor waste, the definition is appropriately sized and 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?

For a single-parameter tool with annotations covering safety and idempotency, the definition is largely sufficient to invoke it. However, 'soft deletes' is left unexplained—there is no statement about what happens to the record, whether it can be restored, or what response to expect, and there is no output schema to fill the gap.

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 description coverage is 100% and the only parameter, id, is documented as 'Vehicle ID'. The description adds no parameter-specific meaning, but at this coverage level it does not need to; the baseline of 3 applies.

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 uses the specific verb 'soft deletes' and identifies the resource 'vehicle', clarifying both the action and the object. This distinguishes it from hard-delete operations and from sibling delete tools for other resource types, even without opening the schema.

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?

Usage is implied by the resource name and 'soft deletes' phrasing, but the description gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, exclusions, or alternatives. Sibling delete tools exist for other resources, but the description does not explain when to choose this tool over them or mention any prerequisites.

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