delete_maintenance

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

The description adds significant behavioral detail beyond the destructiveHint annotation: it emphasizes the action is permanent, clarifies that exactly one entry is deleted, and reveals the confirmation safeguard ('confirm must equal the entry's exact name'). This provides the agent with critical safety context beyond what the annotation alone conveys.

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 exceptionally concise: two sentences with no unnecessary words. The key information is front-loaded ('PERMANENTLY delete'), and every clause earns its place by adding critical details about the deletion process.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema, destructive), the description covers all essential aspects: the action, the permanence, the prerequisite for finding ids, and the confirmation constraint. It is complete for the agent to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining the confirm parameter's exact semantics (must match the entry's name) and directing users to list_maintenance for entry_id values. The entry_id parameter's purpose is implied by its name and the reference to list_maintenance, but a bit more detail on its format would improve clarity.

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 ('PERMANENTLY delete') and the resource ('one maintenance entry'), which is specific and unambiguous. It also distinguishes itself from siblings like set_maintenance or log_maintenance by noting that list_maintenance provides the ids, reinforcing its role as the deletion tool.

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 provides explicit context by instructing users to see list_maintenance for ids, establishing a prerequisite for use. It also specifies the confirm requirement, which is a clear conditional for invoking the tool. While it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives, the name and sibling list make it obvious that this is for deleting maintenance entries specifically.

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