delete_interest_category

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

The description adds significant context beyond annotations: it notes that subscriber associations are removed but subscribers themselves are unaffected, and mentions error handling for non-existent categories. Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, but description enriches understanding.

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 concise and well-structured: action statement, effects, alternatives, param definitions, return format, and example. Every sentence is informative without redundancy.

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?

Covers purpose, effects, parameter sourcing, return type, and error case. Minor omission of the optional 'account' parameter, but overall provides sufficient context for correct tool invocation.

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 description explains the required parameters list_id and category_id with type examples and provenance (e.g., 'Obtain from list_audiences'). However, the optional 'account' parameter is not mentioned, leaving a gap despite schema coverage being 0%.

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 the action: 'Delete an interest category and all its interest options at once.' It distinguishes from sibling tool delete_interest by specifying the scope (entire category vs single option). The verb-resource pairing is unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly gives when-to-use vs alternatives: 'Use delete_interest instead to remove a single option while keeping the category.' Also advises using list_interest_categories to find IDs, providing clear guidance.

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