Delete Custom Property

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

Annotations already signal destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false; the description adds the crucial nuance that this is a soft delete whose existing values become hidden rather than purged, which the hints alone cannot convey. It does not say whether the operation can be reversed/restored, which is the one remaining behavioral gap.

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?

A single tight sentence with no filler; the operation and its key consequence are front-loaded, and every clause (soft-delete, identifier options, hidden values) carries 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?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the soft-delete consequence is covered. However, for a destructive definition-removal tool the description omits the workspaceId parameter's meaning and whether the deletion is recoverable, leaving an agent to guess on scope and risk.

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 description coverage is only 50%: `property` is already documented in the schema as 'Property id or name', so the description merely repeats it, and `workspaceId` is left completely unexplained in both schema and description (including whether it is optional or defaults to the current workspace). No compensation for the coverage gap.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Soft-delete a workspace custom property definition') plus the identifier forms accepted, and 'workspace custom property definition' clearly separates it from clear_doc_property or delete_tag. An agent can select it without opening the schema.

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 'soft-delete' framing implies when this is appropriate (removing a property definition while retaining row history), but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no alternative named, e.g. clear_doc_property for clearing a single doc's value or delete_collection for other definition types.

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