cuemap_lexicon_delete

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

With no annotations, the description carries the safety burden and clearly discloses that deletion is permanent, plus the confirmation gate. It could add side-effect details, but the core destructive behavior is explicit.

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 short sentences with no filler: purpose first, safety condition second. Every word is functional.

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 low-complexity destructive operation, it covers the essential purpose and the confirmation requirement that prevents accidental deletion. With no output schema, it does not describe return values or not-found behavior, but those are less critical than the irreversible-action guard, which is present.

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 schema already describes project and confirmed; the description reinforces the confirmed guard. However, entry_id has no schema description and the tool description only implies it identifies 'one Lexicon entry', leaving the accepted ID formats/format semantics to inference.

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 specific verb 'Permanently delete' and resource 'one Lexicon entry', making the operation unmistakable. It is clearly distinct from sibling tools like cuemap_lexicon_inspect or cuemap_memory_delete.

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?

Clear context: this is the tool for permanently deleting a single lexicon entry, and it adds an explicit safety rule for setting confirmed=true only after user confirmation. It does not enumerate when-not-to-use alternatives, but no delete-specific sibling competes with this operation.

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