plu_delete_availability

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It indicates a destructive mutation ('Delete') and a required user confirmation, but lacks details like irreversibility, error handling, or side effects.

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 extremely concise with one sentence and a warning. It front-loads the main action. However, it could benefit from minimal structuring (e.g., separate lines).

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 lack of annotations, output schema, and parameter descriptions, the information is insufficient for confident usage. The description omits what the expected return value is, error scenarios, and how to obtain the availabilityId.

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 description provides no explanation for the only parameter, availabilityId, despite 0% schema coverage. The agent must guess its meaning from the parameter name alone.

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?

Description clearly states 'Delete an availability period' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like plu_add_availability and plu_delete_unavailability. However, it could be more specific about the scope of deletion.

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 includes 'IMPORTANT: ask user confirmation', which provides a clear usage guideline for safety. But it does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as ensuring the availability exists before deletion.

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