Delete record

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the destructive nature is known; the description adds real value beyond that by disclosing that deletion is soft (reversible via restore) where Snipe-IT supports it, and that confirm: true is mandatory. It leaves open which resources fall back to hard delete and whether related records cascade, which is the main remaining behavioral gap.

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?

A single sentence with the destructive action front-loaded, followed by the reversibility caveat and the confirm requirement. No waste and nothing buried.

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, no-output-schema tool the description covers the essentials (soft delete, restore path, confirm gate), but with 0% param documentation it omits what 'resource' means and what 'id' refers to, and says nothing about permissions or side effects on linked records.

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 carry parameter meaning, but it only explains 'confirm'. The 'resource' enum (18 entity types) and the 'id' parameter are undocumented in both description and schema, leaving two of three required parameters unexplained.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete a Snipe-IT record') and names the sibling it relates to ('see restore'), so an agent knows this is the destructive counterpart to restore. It doesn't mention that 'record' spans 18 resource types, but the core action is unambiguous.

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 signals the recovery path ('soft delete ... see restore') and states the hard precondition 'Requires confirm: true', which is exactly the guidance an agent needs before invoking a destructive tool. It doesn't cover when deletion is inappropriate (e.g. records still checked out) or permission requirements.

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