delete_purchase

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, so the bar is lower, yet the description still contributes real value by disclosing the downstream effect on the project's budget. It does not address whether the deletion is recoverable or what the response returns, but the budget side effect is the non-obvious behavior an agent needs.

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?

A single sentence with zero filler; the action and its consequence are front-loaded and nothing is repeated from the schema or annotations.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be described, and annotations cover the safety and idempotency profile. The description supplies the one missing high-value fact — the budget impact — leaving only minor gaps such as reversibility of the delete.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so both 'id' and the 'confirm' flag (required true to delete) are already documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter detail beyond that, which is the expected baseline when the schema carries the burden.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete a purchase') and adds the consequence that distinguishes it from a generic delete. It does not explicitly contrast with siblings like update_purchase or get_purchase, but the purchase scoping makes the target unambiguous among the many delete_* 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?

No guidance on when to delete versus update, no prerequisites, and no mention of alternatives such as update_purchase or list_purchases. The agent must infer that this is the terminal operation for a purchase record.

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