delete_worker

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It discloses the key behavioral trait that deletion is permanent and affects both scheduler and database, which goes beyond a simple 'delete' statement. However, it doesn't mention reversibility, required permissions, or side effects on associated history.

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, front-loaded with the action and resource, followed by a clarifying effect. Every word earns its place, with no filler.

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 operation with a single parameter and no output schema, the description provides enough context: what it does, the scope (worker), and the effect (scheduler + database). It could mention return values or cascading effects, but these are not essential for this simple tool.

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 has one parameter (worker_id) and description coverage is 0%. The description adds minimal value by saying 'by ID,' which clarifies the parameter's role as an identifier, but it doesn't explain the type or where to obtain the ID beyond what the schema already provides.

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 (delete) and the resource (worker by ID), and specifies the scope by noting it 'Removes from scheduler and database.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like pause_worker or delete_all_workers.

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 implies use for deleting a single worker by ID, but it doesn't explicitly mention when not to use it or provide alternatives (e.g., pause_worker for temporary suspension). The context is clear but lacks explicit exclusions or comparison with siblings.

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