brc_delete_allocation_resolver

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It indicates the operation is a reversal/deletion (destructive) and requires user confirmation before executing. However, it does not mention error handling, idempotency, or what happens on success/failure.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then prerequisite, then caution. Every sentence contributes essential information with no redundancy.

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 deletion tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers purpose, prerequisite, and a critical safety note. However, it lacks details on return behavior, error states, or whether the operation is reversible, which a completely thorough description might include.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining that the 'id' parameter is the 'allocation resolver id' and clarifying that 'confirmWrite' must only be true after user confirmation. This extra context justifies a 4.

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 verb ('reverses/deletes') and the resource ('single allocation by allocation resolver id'), distinguishing it from sibling delete tools that target other entities (e.g., brc_delete_customer, brc_delete_accrual).

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?

Explicitly instructs to first use brc_list_allocated_transactions to find the allocation id, and warns not to set confirmWrite=true without explicit user confirmation. This provides clear when-to-use and when-not-to guidance.

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