pipelines_delete

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses critical behaviors: permanent deletion, removal of all stages, and the need to move deals before deletion. It also advises verifying with 'pipelines_get first'. No contradictions.

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 well-structured with a summary, consequence list, workflow tips, and examples. It is slightly verbose but all sentences add value. Minor redundancy in listing consequences in both tips and examples.

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 simple tool with one parameter, the description covers all necessary context: purpose, side effects, prerequisites, alternatives, and verification step. No output schema exists, but the description adequately addresses what the tool does and its impacts.

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 has 100% coverage with a simple 'id' parameter description. The tool description adds a usage example ('Remove pipeline: { "id": 1 }') but does not provide additional semantic meaning beyond the schema. Baseline 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 clearly states 'Delete a pipeline' and specifies that it permanently removes the pipeline and all its stages. It distinguishes from siblings like 'deals_delete' by explicitly naming the resource and providing context about pipeline-specific consequences.

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 includes explicit workflow tips: irreversible action, need to move deals first, suggestion to deactivate instead, and verification step. It tells when to use and when to consider alternatives ('Consider deactivating instead of deleting').

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