catalog_delete_icons_by_id

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description's restatement of 'delete' adds nothing beyond structured data. It omits genuinely useful behavior: whether deletion is permanent, what happens to icons still referenced by catalog items, and whether a 404 is returned for unknown ids.

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?

Three short lines, but the first two sentences say the same thing twice ('Delete an icon' / 'Delete an existing icon by its unique id'), and the raw HTTP route restates the tool name. Front-loaded but padded with redundancy.

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 single-parameter delete with full annotation coverage and no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient. It is still incomplete on the consequences of a destructive operation — irreversibility and handling of in-use icons — which is exactly what the description should supply when annotations only 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 description coverage is 100% and the single 'id' parameter is documented as a UUID path parameter, so the schema does the work. The description's 'by its unique id' merely echoes the schema and adds no format, lookup, or sourcing guidance.

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 an icon ... by its unique id'), so an agent knows exactly what the tool acts on. It does not differentiate itself from the many other delete tools in the sibling list, but the 'icon' resource is unique enough to avoid ambiguity.

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, no prerequisites (e.g. ownership or permission requirements), and no mention of what to do if the icon does not exist. The agent must infer all of this.

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