apidog_delete_request

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

The description discloses the confirmDelete=true prerequisite, which is a meaningful behavioral guard. With no annotations provided, it carries the full burden but does not mention side effects, permissions, or reversibility. The 'alias' hint suggests it behaves like another tool but without specifying which one.

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 concise, with two short sentences that front-load the core purpose and a critical requirement. Every word adds value without unnecessary elaboration.

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 destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is minimal. It lacks information about return values, prerequisites, side effects, or how it differs from closely related tools. The confirmation guard is the only additional context beyond the schema.

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 coverage is 50% (branchId and projectId have descriptions). The description adds the confirmDelete requirement but does not explain apiDetailId beyond implying it identifies the resource. This partially compensates for the missing schema descriptions but falls short of full clarity.

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 states the action ('deleting') and the target resource ('Apidog HTTP API detail/request'), making the purpose understandable. However, it does not explicitly differentiate this from sibling tools like apidog_delete_api_detail, and the word 'Alias' adds slight 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus other delete-focused siblings (e.g., delete_module, delete_endpoint). The description only mentions the tool's function and a confirmation requirement, but no context, exclusions, or alternatives.

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