lc_preview_delete_yara_source

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It states 'preview deleting' but does not clarify that no actual deletion occurs, or what the preview returns. The behavioral implications are opaque, which could mislead an agent into thinking the tool performs the deletion.

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 very concise (one short sentence), but it omits critical information. It is front-loaded but under-specified, making it minimally acceptable for 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 has 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the preview output is, how to interpret it, or how this tool fits into a larger workflow (e.g., followed by a confirm/delete step).

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 coverage is 0% (no parameter descriptions), and the description adds no information about the three parameters (oid, name, token_ttl_seconds). The agent receives no guidance on parameter purposes or formats.

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 YARA source.' clearly states the action (preview deleting) and the resource (YARA source). It distinguishes from sibling tools like lc_list_yara_sources and lc_preview_delete_yara_rule by specifying the resource type, but does not elaborate on what 'preview' entails.

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 usage guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this preview tool versus the actual delete operation (if one exists) or any alternatives. An agent has no context on workflow or prerequisites.

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