game_center_achievement_releases_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 restates the raw endpoint. It does not disclose that the operation is destructive/irreversible, what happens to the release record and its associations, or any auth/permission requirement. The DEPRECATED marker is the only behavioral trait conveyed.

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?

Very short and front-loaded with the [DEPRECATED] warning before the operation. The only waste is the redundant parenthetical that repeats the same path, but overall it is appropriately sized for a simple delete.

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 one-parameter delete with no output schema, minimal description is tolerable, and the deprecation notice is the key piece of context. Still, it omits irreversibility and permission requirements that matter for a destructive operation, leaving it only minimally adequate.

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 'id' parameter documented as 'the id of the requested resource'. The description adds nothing beyond the path template, so the baseline 3 applies since the schema already does the work.

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 pairs the HTTP verb DELETE with the specific resource path /v1/gameCenterAchievementReleases/{id}, which is unique among siblings (e.g., game_center_achievement_releases_create_instance, game_center_achievement_releases_get_instance). An agent can tell it deletes an achievement release. It stops short of a 5 because the parenthetical merely duplicates the same path verbatim, adding no explanatory value.

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 [DEPRECATED] tag is a real usage signal telling the agent to avoid this tool, which is more than most siblings offer. However, no alternative replacement, prerequisite, or condition for use is named, so usage is only implied.

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