domain_sieve_delete

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. The verb 'Delete' implies a destructive operation, but the description does not state whether the action is permanent, reversible, or what effects it may have on mail filtering. No associated side effects or authentication requirements are mentioned.

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 a single, clear sentence with no filler or redundant information. It is concise and front-loaded, stating the action and target immediately. Every word is meaningful.

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?

Despite having a simple parameter set and no output schema, the tool is a destructive operation with no annotations. The description does not specify that deletion is permanent, whether there are any cascading effects, or any error conditions. For a delete tool, this is insufficient context for an agent to safely invoke it.

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 input schema fully describes all three parameters (domain, alias_id, script_id) with 100% coverage, so the schema carries the main load. The description does not add any additional semantic details beyond what is already in the schema, such as accepted formats or relationships between parameters. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Delete a Sieve filtering script for an alias' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly indicating what the tool does. It includes the qualifier 'for an alias,' which helps distinguish this from the sibling tool 'sieve_script_delete' by implying an alias-scoped deletion, though it does not explicitly name the alternative.

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. There is no mention of exclusions, prerequisites, or that this is the alias-scoped counterpart to the general 'sieve_script_delete'. It is merely a statement of function without usage context.

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