Delete a global variable

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully explains behavioral traits: it performs a cross-reference check, refuses deletion if references exist unless force is true, and warns of compile errors when force is used. This covers key behavioral aspects beyond the basic delete 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 two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the main action, and the second covers the exception and force option. It is front-loaded and easily parseable.

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?

The description covers the main action, refusal condition, and force behavior. There is no output schema, and the description does not mention the return value or success indication. For a simple delete tool, this is mostly adequate, but a mention of success response would improve completeness.

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 covers both parameters with descriptions, but the description adds value by explaining the cross-reference check and the effect of the force parameter (override with potential compile errors). Coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3, but the enrichment justifies a higher score.

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 tool removes a Variable entry from a specific resource (project/variables.gbsres), which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling delete tools like delete_scene by specifying the resource type and the cross-reference checking behavior.

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 explains when the tool refuses (if references exist) and how to override with force, including the consequence of compile errors. It implies when to use the tool (to delete variables) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, though the context of sibling tools provides some implicit guidance.

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