delete_merge_field

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses irreversible data loss, authentication via API key, rate limits, read-only/dry-run mode, and default field restrictions. This is comprehensive beyond what annotations might provide.

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?

Well-structured with sections for summary, warnings, args, returns, example. Front-loaded with main purpose. Slightly verbose but all sentences contribute value.

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 all necessary aspects: what it does, when to use, prerequisites, error conditions, return format, authentication, rate limits. With output schema mentioned, it is complete for a destructive operation.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description explains both parameters: list_id with example, merge_id with instructions to obtain and constraint on default fields. Also explains the return JSON. Fully compensates for lack of schema descriptions.

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 verb 'delete' and the resource 'custom merge field and all its stored data'. It distinguishes from siblings like update_merge_field by emphasizing deletion and noting that default fields cannot be deleted.

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 states 'Use only when you no longer need the field' and warns against default fields. References list_merge_fields to find merge_id. Could be more explicit about alternatives among siblings, but the context is clear.

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