delete_flow

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses that deletion is conditional on category, but fails to mention whether the operation is irreversible, requires special permissions, or has any side effects (e.g., cascading deletes). This is insufficient for a potentially destructive action.

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?

Two sentences, no redundancy, and the conditional logic is front-loaded. 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?

Given the absence of annotations and output schema, the description is too minimal. It omits critical details for a mutation tool, such as whether the operation is reversible, what happens to related records, and expected return values. The schema covers parameter meanings but not behavioral context.

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%, and the parameter descriptions already explain the conditional behavior (e.g., category: 'Specific category — if omitted, deletes all entries for the period'). The description adds no new semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline score of 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 the verb ('delete'), resource ('flow entries'), and scope ('for a period'), with conditional logic for category. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like delete_balance, delete_snapshot, and delete_txn by specifying the resource type and conditional behavior.

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 implies usage for deleting flow entries by period or specific category, but provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over other delete tools or any alternatives. There are no usage conditions or exclusions stated beyond the conditional logic.

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