delete_auto_tag

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It only states 'Delete/dismiss' without mentioning permanence, side effects on assets, permissions, or reversibility. The tool's destructive nature is implied but not elaborated.

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 brief, which is concise, but it borders on under-specification. It lacks structure and context, making it less useful than a fully concise two-sentence description that includes key details.

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 tool with a simple signature and no output schema or annotations, the description should at least clarify the scope of deletion versus removal. The presence of 'remove_asset_auto_tag' among siblings makes this ambiguity a significant gap. The description is incomplete for effective tool selection.

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 input schema covers the single parameter 'id' with a generic description 'ID of the resource'. The description adds no further parameter semantics, so the schema's high coverage (100%) earns the baseline score of 3.

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 'Delete/dismiss an auto tag' clearly identifies the action (delete/dismiss) and the resource (auto tag). However, the slash introduces ambiguity (delete vs dismiss) and does not distinguish this tool from the similarly named sibling 'remove_asset_auto_tag', so it lacks sibling differentiation.

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 such as 'remove_asset_auto_tag'. The description does not specify whether it deletes the auto tag definition globally or removes it from a specific asset, leaving the agent without clear context for selection.

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