cdek_delete_intake

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 discloses the deletion condition (not final status) but does not mention idempotency, reversibility, side effects, or return behavior.

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 short and front-loaded with the main purpose. It contains only two sentences, no fluff, but the inclusion of an Args section is slightly redundant given the parameter is already in the schema.

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 that there is an output schema (though not shown), the description does not need to explain return values. However, it lacks context on error responses, idempotency, or prerequisites beyond the status condition. Adequate for a simple delete but could be more complete.

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?

The parameter 'uuid' is described as 'Intake request UUID', which adds meaning beyond the schema's type definition. However, with 0% schema description coverage, the description only provides basic identification without format or source details.

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 tool deletes an intake request, specifies the HTTP method and endpoint, and differentiates itself from sibling tools like cdek_delete_order or cdek_delete_webhook by focusing on intakes.

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 notes that the intake can be deleted only in non-final status, providing a clear condition. However, it lacks guidance on when not to use it or mentions of alternative actions like updating the intake.

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