Delete template

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint/idempotentHint, but the description goes further: it states the deletion is permanent (no undo), that the call fails when a campaign or workflow still references the template, and that it returns a confirmation. The referential-integrity failure mode is not derivable from annotations or schema.

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?

Front-loaded with the purpose, then organized into short labeled sections with no filler; every line carries information. The bold-header scaffolding is slightly heavier than needed for four short lines but costs little.

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 one-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, everything needed is present: what it destroys, how it differs from the bulk variant, what blocks it, and what it returns. The safety profile is covered by annotations and reinforced by the description.

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?

Only one parameter (id) and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the UUID argument. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, which matches the baseline 3 for a fully documented single-param tool.

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 with clear scope: "Permanently delete one template." It explicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling plunk_bulk_delete_templates, so an agent can route correctly without opening any schema.

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?

Provides an explicit "Not for" exclusion naming the alternative (plunk_bulk_delete_templates, up to 1000 atomic), a positive "Use when" condition, and a named prerequisite check (plunk_get_template_usage) that determines whether the call succeeds.

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