delete_account_balance_history

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, but the description adds meaningful behavioral context: the operation is irreversible and affects Net Worth views. It also clarifies the scope ('ALL') which is crucial for a destructive operation. This goes beyond what the annotation alone conveys.

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 primary action and scope are front-loaded, the consequence is stated clearly, and the alternative tool is mentioned succinctly. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a destructive, irreversible operation with two well-documented parameters, this description is complete. It explains scope, irreversibility, impact on Net Worth, and the correct alternative for a narrower operation. No output schema exists, but for a delete tool this is acceptable and not a meaningful gap.

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 100%, so both account_id and account_type are already documented in the input schema. The main description does not add parameter-specific details, but it doesn't need to because the schema already explains each parameter, including the account_type enum semantics and the note about synced crypto using dedicated tools.

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 states a specific verb ('Delete'), a precise resource ('ALL historical balance entries for a single account'), and the scope ('ALL'), clearly distinguishing it from the sibling tool delete_balance_history_entry. An agent can immediately understand what this tool does and what it does not do.

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 explicitly provides the when-to-use guidance: use this when deleting the entire history, and use delete_balance_history_entry when removing a single month. It names the alternative tool directly, leaving no ambiguity about routing between the two.

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