provider_delete_right

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 description owes extra context rather than a restatement. It adds only the HTTP verb and route, leaving open what happens if the right is still bound to a role or whether the delete can be undone.

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?

Short and front-loaded, but sentence two ('Deletes the requested Custom Right by id') merely restates sentence one, and the raw route adds little for an agent. One of three lines is wasted.

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?

A trivial one-parameter mutation whose safety profile is fully carried by annotations and whose only parameter is described in the schema. It is adequate but silent on failure modes (right in use, not found) that would matter for an irreversible delete.

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% (a single 'id' path property), so the baseline is 3. The phrase 'by id' confirms the identifier is the custom right's id rather than a role or category id, which is mildly useful given the many delete siblings.

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: 'Delete an individual custom right' plus 'by id'. That is enough to distinguish it from the neighbouring category-level and group/user delete tools, though it never explicitly names those alternatives.

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?

No statement of when to use this versus provider_delete_custom_rights_category, provider_query_rights, or provider_create_right, and no prerequisites such as the right needing to be unused. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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