catalog_delete_admin_sources_by_source_id

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that – no mention of irreversibility, cascading effects on catalog items sourced from this source, or required privileges – so beyond the structured fields its contribution is essentially zero.

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?

Very short, but the first two sentences say the same thing and the third repeats the route already present in the title annotation. Nothing is front-loaded with information value; it is under-specified rather than truly concise.

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 destructive admin delete with no output schema, the description should say what is destroyed (just the source record, or its synced content/policies) and whether the action can be undone. None of that is present, leaving a meaningful gap even though annotations flag destructiveness.

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 coverage is 100% and the single sourceId parameter is fully documented as a UUID path parameter, so the schema does the work. The description only says 'with the supplied ID', adding no format or sourcing hints 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?

States a clear verb (delete) and resource (catalog source) plus the HTTP route, which disambiguates an otherwise opaque tool name. It does not differentiate from the closest sibling catalog_get_admin_sources_by_source_id or from other catalog delete tools such as catalog_delete_icons_by_id.

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 versus the matching get tool, no prerequisites (admin rights implied only by the tool name), and no warning about consequences. The agent must infer everything from the word 'Delete'.

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