delete_schedule

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only restates the action. It does not mention irreversibility, side effects on active schedules, or any confirmation/error behavior. The destructive nature is inferred from the verb rather than explicitly disclosed.

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 no filler, and the parameter is documented in a standard Args block. It earns a high score for brevity, though the terseness contributes to missing behavioral context.

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 delete operation with an output schema present, the description is minimally adequate: it names the resource and the required identifier. It is not fully complete because it omits behavioral consequences, where to obtain the ID, and any guidance on alternative related tools.

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 adds one semantic detail: schedule_id is a 'Numeric schedule ID to delete,' which is useful given the schema only provides the title 'Schedule Id.' However, it is terse and slightly ambiguous because the schema types the parameter as a string while the description says 'Numeric.'

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 and resource: 'Delete a schedule.' It distinguishes itself from sibling schedule tools through the resource name, though it closely mirrors the tool name and adds no scope or uniqueness.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like set_schedule_status or delete_light, nor any mention of prerequisites such as retrieving the schedule ID via list_schedules. Usage context is only implied by the verb 'Delete.'

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