delete_destination

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It discloses that the tool is destructive, but lacks details on what exactly is deleted (e.g., associated data, irreversibility), authentication requirements, or response behavior. The warning is good but not fully transparent.

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, with the destructive warning front-loaded. Every part serves a purpose, though it could be slightly more detailed without becoming verbose.

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 2 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and a usage warning. However, it lacks information about post-deletion behavior, synchronous vs asynchronous operation, or error cases, which would be helpful given no annotations.

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 both parameters have descriptions. The description adds a requirement for the schema_file parameter (must confirm by reading a file), providing some additional behavioral context. However, it does not meaningfully enhance understanding beyond the schema.

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 the action ('Deletes') and the resource ('a destination from your Fivetran account'), using a specific verb and resource. It also includes a warning about destructiveness, which helps differentiate from sibling tools like create_destination or modify_destination.

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 explicitly instructs to 'Confirm with user before calling' due to destructiveness, providing clear when-to-use guidance. It does not explicitly state alternatives, but the warning strongly implies this tool should only be used when deletion is intended and confirmed.

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