bundle_id_capabilities_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 behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing beyond the raw endpoint. It does not state that the operation is destructive, irreversible, whether it cascades to related resources, or what permissions are required.

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, but the parenthetical '(DELETE /v1/bundleIdCapabilities/{id})' is a verbatim duplicate of the text before it, which is pure waste. What remains is under-specification rather than genuine conciseness.

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 operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description should at minimum note irreversibility and scope. It supplies none of this, leaving the agent without enough context to invoke the tool responsibly.

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% with a single required 'id' parameter, so the schema already documents it fully. The description adds no meaning beyond the schema, but with high coverage the baseline of 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 is essentially the tool name restated as an HTTP route: the verb 'DELETE' and resource 'bundleIdCapabilities' are already encoded in the name. It provides no added explanation of what a bundle ID capability is or how this differs from the sibling update/create capabilities 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 guidance whatsoever on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as bundle_id_capabilities_update_instance or bundle_ids_delete_instance. No prerequisites or context are given.

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