fm_delete_record

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Delete a record', with no mention of side effects, permissions required, whether the deletion is irreversible, or what happens to related data. This is insufficient for a mutation operation.

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 at one sentence, with no waste. However, it is so minimal that it sacrifices informativeness. Balance is acceptable, but could be slightly more detailed without losing conciseness.

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?

Given the lack of output schema and annotations, the description should provide more context about the operation's results, error handling, or side effects. It fails to do so, making it incomplete for a tool with three parameters and a mutation action.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for its three parameters (layout, database, recordId), so the schema already explains each parameter adequately. The description adds no additional value beyond what the schema provides, leading to a baseline score of 3.

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 (delete) and the resource (record) with the key identifier (recordId). It is not a tautology and distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like fm_create_record or fm_edit_record. However, it could be more specific about the scope, e.g., whether the deletion is permanent.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as fm_edit_record or fm_duplicate_record. There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or context indicating appropriate use cases.

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