Delete Custom Property

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, but the description adds crucial nuance: it is a soft-delete, and existing values are hidden. This goes beyond the annotation by explaining the actual effect (hiding, not permanent destruction), which is valuable behavioral context.

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, front-loaded with the action and key qualifiers. Every word earns its place; no fluff or repetition of schema fields.

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 simple delete tool with an output schema, the description adequately covers the action, the target resource, the identifier flexibility, and the soft-delete behavior. It could have added note about reversibility or effects on existing docs, but that may not be necessary given the output schema and simplicity.

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 schema provides a description for 'property' ('Property id or name') but not for 'workspaceId'. The description reinforces that the property can be identified by id or name, which adds slight value. However, with 50% schema coverage, the description could have compensated more by explaining workspaceId semantics or the relationship between the parameters, but it doesn't.

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 ('soft-delete') and resource ('workspace custom property definition'), and clarifies the lookup mechanism ('by propertyId or name'). This clearly differentiates from sibling tools like delete_tag or delete_doc.

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 does not name alternative tools, but it provides enough context: it targets custom property definitions and specifies how to identify them. Since the operation is a soft-delete, it implies this is used when you want to remove a property while preserving underlying values. No exclusions or explicit alternatives, but clear enough for a single-purpose tool.

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