delete_item

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals that deletion requires a valid preview, which is a notable behavior, but it does not explain what constitutes a valid preview, whether deletion is permanent, or any potential side effects. For a destructive operation, this is limited transparency.

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 single, concise sentence that immediately states the action and the key requirement. There is no filler or redundant information, and it is front-loaded with the verb and resource. It is appropriately sized for a tool with one parameter.

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 param, no output schema, no annotations), the description is too sparse to be fully self-contained. It does not mention how to obtain a valid preview, nor does it explicitly connect to preview_delete_item. An agent might struggle to know the correct sequence, especially with many sibling preview/apply/delete tools.

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 schema only defines previewId as a string with minLength 8 and no description, so schema coverage is 0%. The description adds meaning by indicating the parameter is a 'valid preview', implying a preview ID from a prior operation. This helps, but it still does not clarify how to obtain the preview or the format of the ID, so the compensation is partial.

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 the action (Delete) and the resource (a list item), and adds a specific condition (using a valid preview). This distinguishes it from similar deletion tools for other resources (delete_list, delete_column) and from preview_delete_item, which creates a preview rather than deleting directly. However, it does not explicitly mention the workflow of first calling preview_delete_item, so the purpose is clear but not fully elaborated.

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 phrase 'using a valid preview' implies that the tool should be used after obtaining a preview, likely from the sibling tool preview_delete_item. This is contextual guidance, but the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it name the exact prerequisite tool. Thus, usage is implied rather than explicitly documented.

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