delete_culture

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose that the operation cascades to translations and linguistic metadata, which is valuable. However, it omits other behavioral traits such as reversibility, permissions required, or error behavior (e.g., if locale does not exist), leaving some gaps.

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 that is immediately understandable and front-loaded with the action and object. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 delete operation with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core effect. However, the absence of any annotation means the description should also clarify operational context such as permanence, dependency checks, or session requirements. It provides partial completeness but not full.

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 only 50% (locale has a description, sessionId does not). The tool description does not compensate for this gap; it does not mention either parameter by name or provide additional meaning beyond what the schema already states. sessionId remains entirely unexplained in both schema and description.

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 a specific verb ('Delete'), a clear resource ('a culture (locale)'), and specifies the full scope ('all its translations and linguistic metadata from the model'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like delete_translation, which targets a single translation, and add_culture, which is an inverse operation.

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 the tool is for removing an entire locale with all associated data, but it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over alternatives (e.g., delete_translation for individual translations) or state any preconditions or exclusions. Usage context is implied but not spelled out.

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