Supprimer un(e) candidat

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

The description adds the warning 'Action irréversible' which is beyond the annotations (destructiveHint=true). It clearly informs the agent of the permanent nature of the operation, adding valuable behavioral context.

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 with a warning icon, a clear purpose statement, and a single parameter explanation. Every sentence is necessary and front-loaded for quick understanding.

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 operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose and irreversibility. It could mention potential side effects like cascade deletions, but overall it is sufficiently complete.

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 100% and the schema already describes the 'id' parameter. The description repeats this with 'Identifiant de l'entité à supprimer' which adds minimal extra meaning. 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 explicitly states it deletes a candidate from BoondManager, using a strong verb and resource. It is clearly distinguished from sibling tools like boond_candidates_create, get, update, and search by being the only delete operation for candidates.

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 warns of irreversibility with a warning emoji, which implies cautious use, but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives or mention any prerequisites or conditions.

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