beta_app_clip_invocations_delete_instance

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It conveys only the DELETE verb, which implies a destructive mutation, but says nothing about irreversibility, required permissions, side effects, or cascade behavior. For a destructive operation with zero annotation coverage, this is a major gap.

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 value is extremely short but not concise in a useful sense: the parenthetical duplicates the endpoint string verbatim, which is pure waste, while essential context is omitted. Structure is not front-loaded with meaning because there is no meaning beyond the path.

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 delete tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should at minimum explain what is removed, whether the operation is reversible, and any permission requirements. It provides none of this, leaving the definition inadequate for safe invocation.

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?

There is a single 'id' parameter with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema already documents it and the description adds nothing. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting, and the description does not compensate by clarifying which ID this endpoint expects.

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 is a restatement of the tool name in HTTP path form: 'DELETE /v1/betaAppClipInvocations/{id}'. It does name a verb and resource, but adds no distinguishing information beyond what the tool name already conveys, and gives no sibling differentiation among the many *_delete_instance tools.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no alternatives named. An agent cannot tell from the text under what circumstances this delete should be preferred or avoided.

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