lc_preview_delete_installation_key

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

The description implies a non-destructive preview, but does not disclose what the preview returns, side effects, or required permissions. With no annotations, the description fails to adequately convey behavioral traits.

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 short, but at the cost of missing critical information. It does not earn its place by being informative; it is under-specified rather than concise.

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 annotations, output schema, and parameter documentation, the description is far from complete. It does not explain the preview's behavior, return value, or parameter roles, making it insufficient for correct tool selection and invocation.

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?

All three parameters (oid, token_ttl_seconds, installation_key_id) are undocumented in both the schema and the description. The description adds no meaning to the parameter names, leaving their purpose and format unclear.

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 (preview deleting) and the resource (installation key). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by the specific resource name, but does not explain what 'preview' entails compared to other preview tools.

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 lc_get_installation_key or actual deletion tools. No prerequisites or conditions are mentioned.

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