Receipts Delete Receipt

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

Annotations already indicate the operation is destructive and not idempotent. The description adds only the vague hedge 'This may delete, clear, reset, or otherwise remove data,' which provides no concrete side-effect information such as irreversibility, cascaded deletions, or impact on matched receipts/transactions.

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 first sentence is appropriately concise and clear. The second sentence is redundant filler that says little beyond what the annotations and first sentence already convey, so not every sentence earns its place.

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 potentially destructive operation with no output schema, the description should explain what happens after deletion, whether the action is permanent, or what effect it has on linked data. The annotations cover the destructive nature, but the description lacks the practical context an agent would need to call this safely and correctly.

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 schema already documents fields and output_mode with meaningful descriptions, so the description need not repeat them. However, the required receipt_id parameter has no schema description and the description adds no clarification, though its purpose is reasonably inferable from 'Delete receipt.'

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 begins with 'Delete receipt,' a specific verb and resource that clearly says what the tool does and separates it from sibling operations like update or unmatch. The second sentence, however, broadens the behavior to 'clear, reset, or otherwise remove data,' which slightly muddies the scope.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as receipts_unmatch_receipt or receipts_update_receipt. Usage is only implied by the tool's name and first sentence, not explicitly stated.

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