Supprimer un(e) projet

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds important context: the action is irreversible and may involve a confirmation prompt. This adds value beyond annotations and does not contradict them.

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 very concise: two short sentences plus a bullet point. The main action and warning are front-loaded. Every sentence adds value, and there is no redundant or unnecessary 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one param, delete operation), annotations provide destructiveHint, and an output schema likely documents return values. The description covers purpose, irreversibility, confirmation behavior, and parameter. It is complete for the expected complexity.

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%, so the schema fully documents the id parameter. The description reiterates the parameter with a brief purpose-specific description ('Identifiant de l'entité à supprimer'), which adds minimal new meaning. 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 explicitly states 'Supprime un(e) projet' which clearly identifies the action and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create, get, search, and update by describing deletion. The warning about irreversibility reinforces the purpose.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, but the action is obvious from the name and purpose. It provides a usage note about confirmation elicitation if supported, which is helpful but does not cover exclusions or alternatives.

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