delete_meal_plan

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the destructive action ('Delete') but fails to mention critical details like whether deletion is permanent, requires specific permissions, has side effects (e.g., cascading deletions), or returns any confirmation. This is inadequate for a mutation tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 a single sentence that directly states the tool's function. It is front-loaded with the core action and resource, with zero wasted words, making it efficient for quick comprehension.

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 destructive nature, lack of annotations, no output schema, and low schema coverage, the description is incomplete. It omits behavioral traits, usage context, parameter details, and return values, failing to provide sufficient information for safe and effective tool invocation.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It specifies that the parameter 'id' is for identifying the meal plan to delete, adding meaning beyond the schema's type definition. However, it doesn't clarify the ID format, source, or constraints, leaving gaps in parameter understanding.

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 resource ('meal plan by ID'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'update_meal_plan' or 'get_meal_plan' beyond the verb, missing explicit sibling distinction.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'update_meal_plan' or 'list_meal_plans'. The description lacks context about prerequisites, such as needing an existing meal plan ID, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the verb alone.

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