tochka_delete_closing_document

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

The description mentions the source of the document_id (from tochka_upd result), adding context beyond the destructiveHint annotation. However, it does not disclose permanence, side effects, or error handling. With annotations already indicating destructiveness, this is adequate but not enriched.

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 concise, with one sentence for the action and an argument list. It front-loads the action clearly. The argument format (Args:) is non-standard but still efficient. Minimal waste, though could be slightly more structured.

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 deletion tool with an output schema (not shown), the description covers the input sufficiently but omits return value or error handling (e.g., what happens if document_id is invalid). The provenance hint partially compensates for lack of broader context.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description fully compensates by explaining the document_id parameter as a 'Closing document UUID from tochka_upd result'. This tells the agent both the type (UUID) and the source, which is highly valuable for correct invocation.

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 a closing document (UPD/Act) by document ID, specifying the verb 'delete' and the resource 'closing document'. It distinguishes from sibling delete tools like tochka_delete_invoice by explicitly naming the document type.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to delete an invoice vs. a closing document). No mention of prerequisites or conditions under which deletion is appropriate.

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