Delete Custom Item

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention that deletion is permanent, irreversible, or that it requires any specific permissions. For a destructive operation, this is a significant gap.

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 a single concise sentence, but it is under-specified rather than appropriately concise. It states the basic action but omits important details that would make it more useful, such as permanence or failure behavior. It is not overly wordy, but it is too brief.

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 and output schema, the description should do more to explain the tool's behavior. For a delete tool, it should at least note that the deletion is permanent and perhaps mention required authentication. The current description is minimal and leaves the agent without enough context for a destructive operation.

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 input schema provides 100% coverage for all three parameters, so the description doesn't need to explain them. The description only mentions 'ID', which aligns with the itemId parameter, but adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already documents.

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 'Hapus satu custom item berdasarkan ID' clearly states the action (delete) and the resource (custom item) with the key parameter (ID). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_custom_item and update_custom_item by using the verb 'Hapus' (delete), but it doesn't add explicit scope or context beyond the title.

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 implies usage when you want to delete a custom item, but it provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions. The context is clear enough for a straightforward delete operation, but there is no extra guidance.

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