uc_catalog_delete

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

Annotations already mark the tool as destructive (destructiveHint=true) and non-read-only (readOnlyHint=false). The description adds no behavioral context beyond this, such as irreversibility, ownership requirements, or consequences of deletion.

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 very concise (one sentence), but it includes a backtick HTTP path that adds noise rather than value. It could be more informative without being longer.

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 delete operation, the description should mention irreversible effects or the need for the force parameter. It does not explain what happens to dependent objects or provide context beyond the API endpoint. The output schema exists, so return values are not required, but behavioral context is lacking.

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?

The input schema provides complete descriptions for both parameters (100% coverage). The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema offers, so it meets the baseline for high coverage.

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 clearly identifies the action ('Delete') and the resource ('catalog'), and the inclusion of the HTTP path reinforces specificity. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like uc_catalog_create, uc_catalog_get, etc.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., other catalog tools). No mention of prerequisites like catalog existence or the need for force parameter when catalog is non-empty. The description lacks usage context.

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