delete_recurring

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only repeats the action of deleting, without noting consequences such as irreversibility, impact on associated transactions, or required permissions. The description adds no behavioral transparency beyond the obvious destructive implication of the verb.

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 a single sentence with no redundancy, and the core action is front-loaded. It is efficiently sized, though it sacrifices informative content for brevity.

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 one required parameter and no output schema or annotations, the description is the only source of context. It fails to explain what the 'id' identifies, what happens after deletion, or any side effects. The description is incomplete for safe usage.

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 is responsible for explaining the 'id' parameter. It does not mention 'id' at all, leaving the agent to guess what the identifier refers to or any format requirements. The description provides zero value for understanding the parameter.

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 states a clear verb ('Delete') and a specific resource ('a recurring transaction rule'), which unambiguously identifies the operation. It distinguishes from sibling delete_rule by specifying 'recurring' as the object, so the agent knows exactly which entity type is affected.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like delete_rule or update_recurring. The description does not mention any context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the name and schema.

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