Price Tables Delete

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered upstream. The description adds genuinely useful auth context (required scope write_products) and the API version, but says nothing about irreversibility or what happens to attached variant/customer price records.

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?

Four short lines, front-loaded with the action, then endpoint, scope and version. No filler, though the HTTP line is mostly redundant with the tool name.

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 single-parameter destructive delete whose annotations already flag destruction and idempotency, the description supplies the missing piece an agent needs before calling it: the required scope. There is no output schema to explain, and the remaining gaps are minor.

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 100% with a single required 'id' parameter already documented as "Price table ID". The path template {id} in the description merely restates what the schema provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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 ("Delete a price table") plus the underlying endpoint, which clearly distinguishes it from tiendanube_price_tables_create/update/list. It stops short of explicitly naming those siblings as alternatives, so a 5 is not warranted.

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 guidance on when to delete versus update or how to remove only variants/customers from a table (the price_tables_variants_remove / customers_remove siblings). The only implied usage comes from the verb itself.

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