reach_deleteAProfileSegmentV1

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral transparency. It explicitly discloses that the segment definition is removed but contacts are left untouched, which is the key side effect of this delete operation. This provides essential context about what gets destroyed.

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 concise sentences with the primary action front-loaded in the first sentence and the important caveat in the second. There is no filler or redundant 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?

For a simple delete tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior: the segment definition is deleted and contacts remain. It does not specify whether the operation is reversible or what the exact relationship between profileUuid and segmentUuid is, but these are minor gaps given the simple context.

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?

Both parameters have schema descriptions that are merely tautological ('Profile uuid parameter', 'Segment uuid parameter'), and the description adds no additional parameter semantics. However, the parameter names are self-explanatory, and the schema coverage is 100%, so a baseline of 3 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 uses the specific verb 'Delete' with resource 'segment', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools that create, update, or list segments. The tool name further specifies 'AProfileSegment', and the description's clarity avoids ambiguity.

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 clearly states that only the segment definition is removed and contacts are left untouched, providing an implicit when-not-to-use: if the goal is to delete contacts, this is not the tool. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or specify conditions for use, so it falls short of the highest level.

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