delete_customer_request

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

The description discloses the key side effect of unlinking work items, which adds behavioral context beyond the schema. However, it does not mention irreversibility, permissions, failure conditions, or the scope of unlinking in detail. Since annotations are absent, the description carries the burden and provides moderate transparency.

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 brief, front-loaded with the core action, and includes a clear Args section. Every sentence earns its place with no unnecessary verbiage.

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 simple delete tool with no output schema and two parameters, the description covers the primary action, the side effect, and parameter meanings. It does not address error cases or prerequisites, but the tool's low complexity makes this acceptable.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description compensates by explaining that both parameters are UUIDs and specifying their roles: customer_id identifies the customer, request_id identifies the customer request. This adds meaning beyond the bare schema even though it does not dive into relationships or validation.

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 action ('Delete a customer request') and the resource being affected, plus the side effect of unlinking work items. This is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_customer or delete_work_item.

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 usage is implied by the tool's name and description, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any mention of prerequisites or exclusions. It is clear that this tool is for deleting customer requests, but no alternative is named.

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