delete_reminder_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively communicates key traits: it's a destructive operation (implied by 'delete'), it cascades to all reminders in the list, and it's irreversible ('This action cannot be undone'). However, it lacks details on error handling, response format, or side effects beyond the 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 extremely concise—two sentences that are front-loaded with the core action and critical warning. Every word earns its place, with no redundant or vague language, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (destructive operation with cascading effects), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the irreversible nature and scope but misses details like error cases (e.g., if the list doesn't exist), response format, or permissions required, leaving gaps for an agent to infer.

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%, with the parameter 'name' fully documented in the schema. The description does not add any additional semantic context beyond what the schema provides (e.g., format examples, validation rules, or how 'name' is used). Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as the schema handles parameter documentation adequately.

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 specific action ('Delete a reminder list and all its reminders') and distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'delete_reminder' (which deletes individual reminders) and 'list_reminder_lists' (which only lists them). It explicitly mentions the resource being affected (reminder list and its reminders).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'delete_reminder' (for individual reminders) or 'rename_reminder_list' (for modifying instead of deleting). It does not mention prerequisites, such as whether the list must exist or be empty, or contextual factors like permissions needed.

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