Supprimer un(e) produit

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

The description explicitly states the action is irreversible and mentions confirmation elicitation, adding context beyond the annotations (destructiveHint: true, readOnlyHint: false). No contradictions.

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 concise (two sentences plus args list), front-loads the purpose, and adds a warning in a single line. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

The description adequately covers the delete action, with warnings about irreversibility and confirmation. The presence of an output schema likely explains return values, so no further description needed. Minor gap: no mention of whether the deletion applies to the whole product or specific versions.

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 description simply restates the parameter 'id' with minimal context. Since the input schema already defines 'id' with a description ('Identifiant unique de l'entité BoondManager (numérique)'), the description adds no significant new meaning. Schema coverage is 100%, so baseline 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 'Supprime un(e) produit de BoondManager', specifying the verb (delete) and resource (product). It distinguishes from sibling tools like boond_products_create and boond_products_get.

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 provides context on usage by noting the action is irreversible and that confirmation may be requested, but does not explicitly state when to use vs. alternatives. For a delete tool, this is generally clear enough.

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