delete_run

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true. The description adds important behavioral context: the delete is a soft delete (movement to 'deleted' stage) and recoverability, which goes beyond what annotations provide. 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 concise with two sentences: the first defines the action and its key effect, the second provides parameter details. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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 simple operation, the description covers purpose, behavioral effect, and parameter. No output schema exists, but the description does not need to explain return values. Annotations provide destructive hint.

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 0% description coverage, but the description explicitly documents the run_id parameter: 'The run ID to delete.' This adds meaning beyond the bare schema definition.

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 deletes a run and explains it moves it to the 'deleted' lifecycle stage, distinguishing it from a hard delete. The verb 'delete' is specific and the resource 'run' is unambiguous, setting it apart from sibling delete tools like delete_experiment.

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 indicates when to use the tool (to delete a run) and explains the consequence (not shown in UI but recoverable). It provides enough context for an agent to decide, though it does not explicitly list alternatives or contraindications.

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