lc_preview_delete_hive_record

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It only says 'Preview deleting' but does not disclose what preview entails (e.g., dry run, token generation), auth requirements, or side effects. This leaves agents without critical behavioral context.

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?

A single sentence is concise but omits essential details. While there is no fluff, the brevity sacrifices necessary context for agent decision-making.

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 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is severely incomplete. It fails to explain the preview workflow, return value, or how results feed into subsequent actions (e.g., lc_confirm_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?

Schema description coverage is 0% and the tool description provides no parameter explanations. Critical fields like oid, hive_name, key, partition_key, and token_ttl_seconds are undefined, forcing agents to guess meaning from names only.

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 a generic Hive record' clearly states the verb 'preview' and resource 'Hive record', distinguishing it from sibling tools like lc_get_hive_record (retrieval) and lc_preview_set_hive_record (modification). However, 'generic' and 'preview' lack specificity about scope or 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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., actual deletion tool or other preview actions). No mention of prerequisites or subsequent confirmation steps (e.g., lc_confirm_action).

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