ecommerce_deleteStoreV1

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

The description clearly discloses that this is a soft-delete operation: data is preserved and only the store is marked as deleted. This is transparent about the mutation's effect. Without annotations, the description adequately conveys the behavioral traits.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two short sentences. Every word adds value: 'Soft-delete', 'owned by your account', 'data preserved', 'marked as deleted'. No extraneous information.

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 simplicity of the tool (one required parameter, no output schema), the description is fairly complete. It explains the soft-delete behavior, data preservation, and ownership constraint. It could mention reversibility or that the store can be restored, but this is not critical.

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% for the single parameter 'store_id'. The description adds no additional semantics beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., 'The ID of the store to delete.'). The baseline score is appropriate.

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 clearly specifies the verb 'soft-delete' and the resource 'a store owned by your account'. It distinguishes itself from a hard delete by stating that the underlying data is preserved and only the store is marked as deleted. Among siblings, it is the only store deletion tool, so differentiation is implicit.

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 indicates that the store must be owned by your account, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as a hard delete if one exists. No when-not-to-use or alternative tools are mentioned.

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