Supprimer une action

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description adds that the action is irreversible and that a confirmation may be requested if the MCP client supports elicitation. These are important behavioral details that help the agent manage side effects and user interaction. No contradiction with annotations.

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 extremely concise, front-loaded with the action and resource, and immediately follows with the critical warning about irreversibility and confirmation. Every sentence earns its place without repeating schema or annotation information.

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 simple delete tool with one parameter, the description covers the essential behavioral traits (irreversibility, possible confirmation) and the schema covers the parameter. The presence of an output schema handles return values. Minor omission of related side effects or prerequisites, but sufficient for this straightforward operation.

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 already fully describes the only parameter 'id' with a numeric pattern and a clear description. The tool description does not add any additional semantic value for the parameter. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline 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 tool deletes an action from BoondManager ('Supprime une action de BoondManager'), using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes this from other delete tools for different entities (e.g., boond_candidates_delete) by specifying 'action'. The title reinforces but the description adds the BoondManager context.

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 explicit when-to-use or alternatives are provided, but the delete semantics imply usage when an action needs to be removed. The description does not contrast with boond_actions_update or boond_actions_get, leaving selection to the agent's reasoning based on the clear purpose.

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