delete_api_spec

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It clearly indicates a destructive cascading operation ('Delete API specification and all related endpoints/schemas'), which is valuable, but it omits important details such as irreversibility, permission requirements, or whether deletion is hard or soft.

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 that front-loads the action and clearly states the resource and scope. Every word earns its place 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one well-defined parameter), the description covers the core operation and cascade effect. However, for a destructive tool with no annotations or output schema, additional details about what happens after deletion (e.g., confirmation, irreversible action, affected related data) would make it more complete.

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 100%, as spec_id is described as 'API spec identifier,' so the baseline is 3. The description adds no extra meaning about the parameter format, purpose beyond the name, or relationship to the deleted endpoints/schemas.

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 specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('API specification') while also specifying the scope: 'and all related endpoints/schemas.' This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like get_api_spec, list_api_specs, and store_api_spec.

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 offers no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any preconditions, exclusions, or alternative tools, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name and purpose.

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