delete_txn

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

With no annotations, the description reveals that deletion recalculates positions and average cost—an important side effect. It also notes the need for explicit user confirmation. Not fully detailed (e.g., reversibility, permissions), but adequate for a simple delete operation.

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?

Three sentences, all relevant: purpose, usage guideline, and behavioral effect. No redundancy, front-loaded with the action. Every sentence adds value.

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 one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, confirmation requirement, and side effect. Could mention constraints or error cases, but the current information is sufficient for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It only says 'by its id,' which adds minimal meaning beyond the schema's 'id' field. No details on valid ID values or formats beyond what the schema provides.

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 starts with 'Delete a single transaction by its id,' which uses a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes from sibling delete tools (e.g., delete_balance, delete_flow, delete_snapshot) by naming 'transaction.'

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?

Explicitly states the user must confirm and never call without explicit instruction. This provides strong when-to-use guidance. Lacks explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios, but the warning is clear and sufficient.

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