delete_entity

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: creation of a deletion observation, exclusion from snapshots and queries, immutability, and reversibility for audit. This goes beyond just stating 'delete'.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary action. Every sentence provides value without unnecessary detail.

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 no output schema, the description does not explain what the tool returns on success (e.g., an observation ID). It also lacks mention of required parameters upfront, though the schema covers them. Overall, it is adequate but could be 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 coverage is 100% (all four parameters have descriptions). The description does not add meaning beyond the schema for parameters, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool deletes an entity, using a specific verb and resource. It mentions creating a deletion observation that excludes the entity from snapshots and queries, which distinguishes it from a simple delete. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like restore_entity.

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 says to use for 'user-initiated or GDPR-style removal from active use,' providing context on when to use. However, it does not mention when not to use the tool or suggest alternatives like restore_entity for reversible disablement.

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