Delete a data spec

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

While annotations already indicate destructive and idempotent behavior, the description adds 'permanently' and explicitly mentions that associated configuration is also deleted, which goes slightly beyond the annotations. However, it does not describe side effects like Cascading deletes or error conditions.

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 a single, succinct sentence that conveys the essential information without any redundant wording or unnecessary details.

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 simple delete operation, the description is sufficient, especially given the schema and annotations. It mentions the deletion of both the spec and its configuration, which covers the primary context. A minor omission is lack of mention of whether the operation is recoverable, but 'permanently' already implies that.

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 schema already provides descriptions for each parameter (specName and workspaceId) with 100% coverage. The tool description does not add further detail beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline but does not enhance understanding.

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 (delete), the target resource (data spec and associated configuration), and adds 'permanently' to emphasize irreversibility. It is specific and easily distinguishes from other 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any cautionary notes about the destructive nature beyond the verb itself. It does not clarify scenarios where deletion should be avoided or prerequisites.

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