delete_all_workers

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the critical behavioral trait of irreversibility ('Irreversible') and the broad scope ('ALL workers and chains'). It does not mention auth requirements or post-deletion effects, but the most important destructive aspects are covered.

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: 'Delete ALL workers and chains. Irreversible. Use with caution.' Every sentence provides essential information: what it does, its irreversibility, and a warning. No words are wasted.

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 simplicity (no parameters, no output schema) and the destructive nature, the description covers the key points: scope and irreversibility. It could mention prerequisites or what exactly happens to related data, but for a zero-parameter tool, it is adequately complete.

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 tool has zero parameters, and the schema is empty. Per the rubric, the baseline for 0 params is 4. The description adds no parameter-specific information, but none is needed since there are no arguments to clarify.

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 tool's function: 'Delete ALL workers and chains.' This is a specific verb+resource+scope, and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools like delete_worker and delete_chain by explicitly covering all workers and chains.

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 a caution ('Use with caution') but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like delete_worker or delete_chain. The intended use (bulk deletion of everything) is implied rather than stated, and no exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided.

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