delete_contact

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

The description discloses 'This cannot be undone,' which is a critical irreversible-behavior trait. However, it does not elaborate on other effects such as cascading deletion or permission requirements, so it only partially covers behavioral transparency.

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 very concise: 'Delete a contact. This cannot be undone.' Two short sentences, front-loaded, with no unnecessary words.

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 with one parameter and no output schema, the description sufficiently covers the action and its irreversibility. It does not mention side effects on related data, but this is not essential for a basic contact deletion tool.

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 already describes the single parameter 'id' as 'The contact UUID' (100% coverage). The description adds no additional meaning about the parameter, so it achieves the baseline but provides no enhancement.

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 states 'Delete a contact' with a clear verb and target resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like update_contact and list_contacts. The added note about irreversibility reinforces the purpose.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention using update_contact for edits or any context/exclusion criteria, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the name and description.

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