delete_quote

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds 'This cannot be undone,' which clearly communicates irreversibility—an important destructive trait. However, it does not mention permissions, side effects on related data, or any other behavioral context.

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 two short sentences and 9 words total, immediately front-loading the core action ('Delete a quote') and key caveat. Every word earns its place.

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 single-parameter delete tool with no output schema, this description is sufficient: it names the action, target resource, and critical caveat. It lacks deeper context like post-deletion behavior or restrictions, but none are strictly necessary for a basic delete operation.

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 100% describes the only parameter (id: 'The quote UUID'), so the description adds no additional parameter semantics. Baseline 3 is appropriate given the schema's full coverage.

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 'Delete a quote' clearly states the specific action (delete) and resource (quote), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It is distinct from sibling tools like delete_quote_line_item or delete_task, though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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 does it mention prerequisites like whether a quote can be deleted after conversion. Users must infer usage solely from the tool name.

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