DeleteDdl

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It mentions a deletion check and transport request constraints, but does not cover permissions, error conditions, reversibility, or confirmation steps. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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, using only two sentences to convey the main action and key behavioral notes. It is front-loaded with the primary purpose and has no redundant 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?

For a simple two-parameter tool without an output schema, the description covers the basic purpose and one behavioral aspect. However, it omits return values, error handling, prerequisites (e.g., activation status), and success confirmation, leaving gaps for the agent.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value by clarifying that transport_request is required for transportable objects and optional for local $TMP objects, which is not explicitly stated in the schema descriptions.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'Delete' and the resource 'DDL source', and it is easily distinguishable from sibling tools which delete other object types like behavior definitions or classes.

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 use this tool versus checking or creating DDL sources, or versus other Delete* tools. The description only mentions an internal deletion check but does not compare or contrast with alternatives.

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