Delete Form Fields

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: operates on preview environment only, maximum 100 fields, cannot delete certain field types, and requires deploy to take effect. No contradictions.

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 five sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: environment and action, limit, exceptions, use case and prerequisite, and deployment note. It is front-loaded and contains no fluff.

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 has 3 parameters all well-described in schema, an output schema exists, and the description covers behavioral constraints and workflow (preview, deploy), it is fully complete for an agent to select and invoke 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?

The schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for all three parameters. The description goes beyond by adding the maximum 100 constraint for 'fields', restriction on deleting status/assignee/category fields, and hints about verifying field codes first, providing meaningful context beyond the schema.

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 verb 'Delete', the resource 'form fields from a kintone app', and specifies the environment 'preview environment only', distinguishing it from sibling tools that operate on live apps or other resources.

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 explicit when-to-use ('useful for recreating lookup fields when updates fail'), what-not-to-delete ('Cannot delete status, assignee, or category fields'), prerequisites ('Use kintone-get-form-fields first to verify field codes'), and a subsequent step ('Changes require kintone-deploy-app to apply to live app').

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