delete_inventory_variant

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

Annotations already provide destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the description adds marginal value by confirming it deletes one variant and not the product. No side effects or permissions are disclosed, but the annotation coverage is adequate.

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 only two sentences with no redundant information. Every part adds value: what the tool does, how to specify the variant, and what it does not affect.

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 deletion tool with good annotations and an output schema (though not shown), the description is sufficient. It covers the core behavior and constraints. Could be slightly improved by explaining the optional parameters, but overall complete.

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 100%, but parameter descriptions are minimal ('a string that will be trimmed'). The description adds meaning for the 'variant' parameter (can be ID, name, or SKU), but does not explain the optional 'product' and 'category' parameters. Baseline 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 clearly states the action (delete) and the resource (inventory variant/SKU) with specific identifiers (ID, exact variant name, or exact SKU). It also distinguishes from deleting the parent product, making the purpose 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?

The description specifies the identifiers that can be used (ID, variant name, SKU) and clarifies that the product is not deleted. It implies when to use this tool (when you have one of these identifiers) and when not (if you want to delete the product too), but does not explicitly name alternative tools.

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