Docflow Delete Category Samples

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The word 'delete' signals destructiveness, but the description doesn't state whether deletion is permanent, whether it affects underlying files, whether it requires special permissions, or what happens to sample data used in classification. This is a meaningful gap for a destructive operation.

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?

Two concise sentences with no filler. The core action and resource are front-loaded, and the use-case sentence earns its place by guiding when the tool should be invoked.

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 3-parameter destructive tool with no annotations, the description is minimally adequate: it says what is deleted and why. However, it leaves out important context such as permanence, relationship to docflow_delete_files, and how sample_ids are obtained. The presence of an output schema helps but doesn't cover these operational gaps.

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%, and the description only hints that sample_ids refer to 'sample files from a category.' It doesn't explain how to obtain sample_ids, what format they use, or how category_id and workspace_id relate. The parameter names are self-explanatory to a degree, but the description does not compensate for the complete lack of schema parameter documentation.

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 action ('Delete sample files'), a specific resource ('from a category'), and even names the underlying endpoint. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like docflow_delete_files or docflow_delete_category.

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 an explicit use case: 'remove low-quality or irrelevant samples that hurt classification accuracy.' It doesn't mention when not to use it or point to alternatives, but the context is clear enough for an agent to choose it over related delete tools.

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