delete_contact

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and the description reinforces this with 'ДЕСТРУКТИВНО'. It does identify the specific object being deleted, but it adds no additional behavioral context beyond what the annotations and the word 'delete' already convey. There is no contradiction with the annotations.

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 short, front-loaded phrase that states the action and resource in the first clause and warns about destructiveness in the second. There is no filler or unnecessary elaboration, making it efficiently scannable for an agent.

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 operation with two fully documented required parameters and destructive annotations, the description plus schema is sufficient to invoke the tool correctly. It clearly identifies the target and warns about destructiveness; however, it does not describe any postconditions or side effects, which keeps it from being completely thorough.

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%: contact_id is described as 'ID контакта' and confirm is described as 'Must be true to run the operation.' The description itself adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline score 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 a specific verb, 'Удалить' (delete), and a specific resource, 'дополнительный контакт аккаунта' (additional account contact), and even names the underlying method whmcs/delete_contact. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling contact tools like add_contact, update_contact, and get_contacts.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance and does not mention alternatives such as update_contact or get_contacts. The usage is only implied by the verb 'delete' and the tool name, with no explicit context or prerequisites.

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