awb_delete

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Delete,' implying a destructive action but does not warn of irreversibility, required permissions, or potential cascading effects (e.g., data loss).

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 extremely concise, with a single sentence and a parameter definition. It is front-loaded with the action, and every element serves a purpose. However, it could be structured to include a warning or more context in the same space.

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 tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description minimally suffices. Yet it omits any mention of success/error responses, idempotency, or side effects. Given the lack of annotations, more completeness would aid agent decision-making.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, so the description is the sole source of parameter meaning. It defines 'awb_id' as 'Internal AWB record ID,' adding crucial context beyond the schema's title and type. This compensates adequately for the schema 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?

The description explicitly states 'Delete an AWB record,' which clearly indicates the verb (delete) and resource (AWB record). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like awb_create, awb_list, or awb_update_status, though it could be more specific about the scope (e.g., by ID).

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as awb_update_status or awb_generate. It lacks prerequisites, exclusions, or context about when deletion is appropriate.

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