delete_template

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

The annotations include destructiveHint: true, which already signals that the operation is destructive. The description adds that it deletes a 'saved' template, but this is a minor addition. It does not disclose side effects like permanence or whether the deletion can be undone, but with the destructive hint, the agent is aware of the risk.

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 one short sentence, front-loaded with the action, and contains no unnecessary words. It is concise and well-structured.

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 simple deletion operation with one parameter and a destructive hint, the description is sufficiently complete. No output schema is present, so no return value explanation is needed. The parameter is fully documented, and the tool's purpose is clear.

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?

The schema has one parameter `id` with a description 'The template id,' providing 100% coverage. The description does not add any further detail about the parameter, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 uses the specific verb 'Delete' and the resource 'saved email template,' which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_template, list_templates, and get_template. It's not a tautology because it specifies that the template is 'saved.'

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or exclusions. However, the phrasing 'saved email template' implies that this tool is for deleting templates, not drafts or emails, so usage is implicitly clear.

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