gitchanger_delete

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It identifies the tool as destructive but does not state that deletion is irreversible, what related data is removed, or that an SSH Host entry may be affected unless keep_ssh is true.

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 a single concise sentence with no wasted wording and the action is front-loaded. It is appropriately sized, though its brevity contributes to the missing behavioral and usage context.

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?

The tool is structurally simple with two well-described parameters and no output schema, but the absence of annotations makes the missing destructive-behavior details more important. A complete definition should explicitly note irreversibility and the SSH config side effect.

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%, so both the required profile ID and the optional keep_ssh flag are already documented in the input schema. The description adds no further meaning or constraints beyond those schema descriptions, which fits the baseline of 3.

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 a specific verb and resource: delete a Git profile from GitChanger. It distinguishes the operation from siblings like list, switch, or add by naming the deletion action, though it does not explicitly compare against alternatives.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this deletion tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no warning about conditions such as whether the profile must exist or be unused. Usage is only implied by the verb 'delete'.

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