lc_preview_delete_ai_agent

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states 'preview deleting' implying no permanent change, but it does not confirm read-only nature, auth needs, or side effects. The parameter `token_ttl_seconds` is not explained, leaving ambiguity about its role in the preview 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 a single sentence, making it concise and front-loaded. However, it lacks necessary detail (e.g., what a preview entails, parameters role). It is not overly verbose, but could incorporate more information 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 tool's moderate complexity (3 parameters, preview operation, no output schema), the description is insufficient. It fails to clarify the return value (likely a confirmation or simulation result), the meaning of token_ttl_seconds, and how this preview differs from actual deletion. Important context is missing.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the tool description adds no explanation for the three parameters (oid, name, token_ttl_seconds). While oid and name are intuitively identifiers, token_ttl_seconds (default 300) is entirely unexplained, forcing the agent to guess its meaning (likely TTL for a token used in the operation).

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 'Preview deleting an AI agent Hive record' clearly states the specific action (preview delete) and the resource (AI agent Hive record). It distinguishes from sibling tools like lc_preview_delete_hive_record (generic hive record) and lc_get_ai_agent (get, not preview delete). The verb 'preview deleting' accurately conveys a dry-run operation.

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. It does not mention prerequisites (e.g., existence of the agent), when not to use it, or that it should be followed by an actual delete tool like lc_confirm_action or lc_delete_ai_agent. Sibling tools for previewing other deletions exist, but no differentiation is given.

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