delete_activity

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

The description discloses the destructive action (delete) but lacks details on irreversibility, cascading effects on related data, permission requirements, or error handling. With no annotations provided, the description must bear the full burden of transparency, but it does not go beyond the basic operation.

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 extremely short and to the point, with no unnecessary words. It front-loads the purpose and lists parameters clearly. However, it could be considered too terse, missing potential value-add details.

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 tool's simplicity (3 required parameters, no nested objects), the description is minimally adequate. It does not mention what the output indicates (e.g., success confirmation) or any side effects, but the presence of an output schema partially compensates. Overall, it covers the core operation but leaves some uncertainty.

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?

Although the input schema has 0% description coverage, the description explains each parameter in Korean (e.g., '여행 ID' for trip ID, '일자 ID' for day ID, '삭제할 활동 ID' for activity ID). This adds meaningful context beyond the schema's types and titles, helping the agent understand the role of each parameter.

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 '활동을 삭제한다' (delete an activity), specifying the action and resource. It is distinct from sibling tools like create_activity, update_activity, and delete_day, which operate on different resources or actions.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., clear_day_content for bulk deletion, or update_activity for modification). No prerequisites or conditions are mentioned, such as requiring the activity to exist first.

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