delete_sketch_entity

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It states 'Delete' implying a destructive action, but doesn't disclose whether the deletion is permanent, undoable, requires confirmation, or affects dependent entities. No behavioral traits beyond the basic action are revealed.

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, concise sentence with no fluff. It front-loads the action and selection methods. Efficient, though it omits necessary details, so it's not perfect.

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 destructive tool with three optional parameters and no output schema, the description is underspecified. It doesn't explain selection semantics, error conditions, or side effects. An agent would likely need to probe the schema or guess to use it 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It mentions 'by reference, index, or fingerprint' but doesn't map these to the actual parameters (entity, sketch_ref, document_id). The agent cannot derive how to populate these fields from the description alone.

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 states a clear action (delete) and resource (sketch entity), and specifies selection methods (reference, index, fingerprint). This distinguishes it from sibling read-only tools like list_sketch_entities and inspect_sketch_entity, though it doesn't explicitly name them.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., must have a valid sketch entity) or exclusions (e.g., cannot delete if referenced elsewhere). The agent is left to infer usage context from the tool name alone.

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