avito_delete_raw

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

Annotations already provide destructiveHint and readOnlyHint, and the description adds separate context: it is a hard-DELETE operation, requires explicit confirmation flags, and returns a specific JSON envelope. This goes beyond the annotations and helps an agent understand the destructive, confirmation-gated behavior.

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 front-loaded with the destructive scope, then lists operational conditions and arguments. It is slightly repetitive about the flag requirement ('Both ... are required' and then each flag 'must be true'), but every line carries essential information and it stays compact.

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?

With a 7-parameter raw tool, no parameter descriptions in the schema, and a destructive semantic, the description fully covers the expected path, method, parameters, host, confirmation, and return format. The agent can safely invoke this tool directly from 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must explain all 7 parameters. It does so: path is a full path starting with '/', method is DELETE, host has an override default, query/body are JSON, and the two flags must be true. This fully compensates for the sparse schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Delete data at ANY path, including paths not in the catalog,' which clearly distinguishes it from catalog-specific tools like avito_delete_method. It also links to the target API and is concrete about the operation scope.

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 gives actionable conditions: use it for DELETE only, any path, and require both confirm_write=true and i_understand_this_modifies_data=true. It does not explicitly name alternative tools, but these criteria are clear enough for an agent to choose this tool over other raw operations.

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