cst_delete_material

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

The description states deletion but does not disclose side effects (e.g., impact on objects using the material, irreversibility). With no annotations, the description carries full burden but is insufficient.

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?

Extremely short at one sentence, which is concise but lacks necessary details for a destructive tool. Could be considered under-specified.

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?

Simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, but description omits prerequisites, error conditions, and consequences, making it incomplete.

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 100% with parameter description 'Name of the material to delete'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, earning baseline 3.

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 explicitly states the action (delete) and resource (material), with scope (current CST project). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like cst_create_material (create), cst_list_materials (list), etc.

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 delete, prerequisites (e.g., material must exist), or alternatives. Among many material-related siblings, no context is provided for choosing this tool.

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