app_store_version_experiments_delete_instance

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it only offers the [DEPRECATED] marker. It does not state whether deletion is permanent, whether it requires special permissions, or what happens to associated treatments/localizations, so an agent cannot assess risk beyond inferring destructiveness from 'DELETE'.

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?

It is short and front-loaded, which is good, but the same DELETE route is written twice in parentheses, which is pure redundancy. Every word should earn its place and the duplicated path does not.

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 destructive, deprecated endpoint with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too thin. It never explains the deprecation (sunset date, migration path) or the consequences of the delete, so an agent lacks the context needed to call it safely or to choose between it and its siblings.

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% and there is a single id parameter already documented as 'the id of the requested resource'. The description adds nothing beyond repeating the {id} path placeholder, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 names a specific verb (DELETE) and resource (appStoreVersionExperiments) plus the path parameter, so the operation is identifiable. But it essentially restates the tool name as a REST route, with the same string duplicated in parentheses, and offers nothing to distinguish it from the many sibling delete_instance tools beyond the route text.

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?

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. The [DEPRECATED] tag implies an alternative should be preferred, but the description never names the replacement (e.g., the v2 experiments endpoint that exists among siblings), leaving the agent to guess.

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