bw_area_delete

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

The description goes beyond the schema by disclosing the lock/unlock sequence, the underlying HTTP call (DELETE /a?lockHandle=…), and irreversibility. For a destructive operation with no annotations, this is strong behavioral disclosure, though it does not mention cascading effects or permissions.

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 three short, purposeful sentences: purpose, lock/delete/unlock behavior, and irreversibility. Every sentence earns its place and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers the operation, the locking behavior, and the destructive consequence. It does not describe return values or error behavior, but that is not essential given the simplicity of the tool.

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 input schema fully describes the only parameter ('InfoArea technical name to delete'), and the description adds no additional parameter-level meaning. With 100% schema description coverage, the baseline of 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb ('Delete') and a specific resource ('InfoArea'), so an agent immediately knows the target. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like bw_object_delete, but the operation is clear and 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?

No guidance is given for when to choose this tool over alternatives such as bw_object_delete, or when not to use it. The intended use is implied by the name and description, but there is no explicit context, prerequisite, or exclusion.

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