delete_company

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 explicitly states the action is 'Permanently' destructive and describes the side-effect that linked contacts are 'unlinked but not deleted.' This is valuable behavioral context, though it could also mention the confirmed flag requirement, which is in the schema.

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 sentences with no redundancy. The first sentence delivers the core purpose, and the second adds a critical side-effect in a clear, front-loaded manner.

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?

The description, combined with the schema's detailed parameter documentation, provides sufficient context for safe usage. It covers irreversibility and side-effects, making the tool adequately understandable. The confirmation flag is documented in the schema, so the description does not need to repeat it.

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 has 100% description coverage for all three parameters, so the description does not need to add parameter-level details. It does not discuss parameters, but the schema already provides full meanings. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Permanently delete a company account from the CRM' with a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like delete_contact by focusing on company accounts. It also explains the effect on linked contacts, further clarifying its unique 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?

The description provides clear context that this tool is for deleting a company, with no ambiguity about its use case. It mentions the unlink side-effect, but does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios. The context is apparent given the tool name and description.

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