delete_flexible_asset

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool deletes an asset but does not disclose whether deletion is permanent, whether it requires special permissions, or what happens to associated relationships. The return value is mentioned ('JSON string with deletion confirmation') but no behavioral detail beyond that.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core action. The Args and Returns sections are minimal and useful. It could be slightly more structured, but every sentence earns its place.

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 details, the description is thin. It lacks information about permanence, side effects, permissions, or error conditions. The single parameter is documented, but the overall context is insufficient for an agent to invoke this safely and correctly.

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%, but the description explicitly documents the single parameter: 'asset_id: The flexible asset ID.' This adds meaning beyond the raw schema, which only says 'Asset Id' with type integer. However, it doesn't clarify the ID format or how to obtain it, so it's adequate but not rich.

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 clear verb and resource: 'Delete a flexible asset.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like update_flexible_asset and create_flexible_asset, though it doesn't explicitly name them. The action is unambiguous.

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, no prerequisites, and no mention of consequences (e.g., whether deletion is permanent or cascades to related items). The context is minimal and leaves usage entirely to inference.

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