Delete Nutrition Plan

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals the destructive scope by stating that all days and meals are removed along with the plan, which is significant. It stops short of irretrievability or permission requirements, but the core destructive nature is well conveyed.

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, front-loaded sentence that succinctly states the action and its scope. Every word adds value, and there is no fluff or repetitive phrasing.

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 zero-parameter, no-output-schema tool, the description fully covers what the tool does and what will be removed. An agent has enough information to invoke it correctly without needing more detail.

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?

There are zero parameters, and the schema confirms this with an empty properties object. With no parameters to document, a baseline of 4 is appropriate; no additional parameter meaning is needed.

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 uses a specific verb ('Deletes') and a clear resource ('the active nutrition plan'), and further specifies the scope ('and all its days/meals'). This makes it readily distinguishable from sibling tools like update_nutrition_plan or delete_workout_template.

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 makes the tool's purpose explicit, so when an agent needs to remove the active nutrition plan, the usage context is clear. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the deletion wording provides enough contextual direction.

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