schematic_delete_page

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

Without annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the destructive nature and the constraint about the last page, but does not cover other behavioral aspects such as permission requirements, reversibility, or side effects on related elements.

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 sentence, front-loading the action and constraint. It is concise but lacks details about parameters and usage, which is appropriate for a simple tool but could be more informative.

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 has two parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the core operation and a key constraint, but it does not explain return values, error cases, or parameter details, leaving gaps for an agent.

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 schema has 0% description coverage for parameters, and the description does not explain the purpose of 'pageUuid' or 'reason' beyond the schema structure. The description adds no meaningful guidance on how to obtain the UUID or how the reason parameter is used.

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' and the resource 'schematic page', and includes a specific constraint about the last remaining page, which distinguishes it from sibling tools that deal with other schematic operations.

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 does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'schematic_rename_page' or 'schematic_move_components'. It only mentions a constraint (cannot delete the last page), but no when-to-use or when-not-to-use advice.

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