delete_reminder

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states 'Delete' but does not reveal whether the deletion is permanent or reversible, what happens to dependent data, whether an error occurs for non-existent IDs, or what the response includes. This is a significant gap for a destructive tool.

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, focused sentence. It is concise, front-loaded, and contains no fluff. Every word earns its place given the tool's simplicity.

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 simple (1 parameter, no output schema), but the description is minimal. It does not explain what the caller should expect after deletion (e.g., success acknowledgement, deleted object, 404 error). This makes it incomplete for an autonomous agent that needs to infer handling of the 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 description coverage is 100% (reminderId is described as 'ID of the reminder to delete'). The tool description adds no further semantic value beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 "Delete a reminder by ID" clearly identifies the action (delete), the resource (reminder), and the method (by ID). It is specific and distinguishes this tool from siblings like create_reminder, update_reminder, and search_reminders.

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 usage: you would use this tool when you want to delete a specific reminder identified by its ID. However, it provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it mention alternatives like update_reminder or soft-delete behavior.

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