delete_contact

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the trailing 'DESTRUCTIVE.' merely restates what structured data provides and adds no new context. The description says nothing about irreversibility, cascade effects on linked records, or permission requirements, so it contributes no value beyond 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?

Two short, front-loaded sentences with no filler. It is efficient, though arguably under-specified rather than truly concise, which keeps it off a 5.

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 two-parameter destructive tool with full schema coverage and annotations covering the safety profile, the description is minimally adequate. It omits what deletion does to dependent data and any alternative-path guidance, leaving real gaps 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?

Schema description coverage is 100% with both contact_id and confirm fully documented, so the schema carries the parameter burden and baseline 3 applies. The description adds no format hints (e.g., where to obtain a contact ID) or semantics beyond what the schema states.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete an additional account contact') and even cites the underlying API operation (whmcs/delete_contact). The word 'additional' usefully distinguishes this from deleting the primary client record, though it does not name sibling tools like add_contact or update_contact explicitly.

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 use this versus update_contact, get_contacts, or other contact-management siblings, and no prerequisites or caveats are stated. The only implicit condition is the 'confirm' flag, which is already documented in the schema, not the description.

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