Delete a meeting type

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and idempotentHint=false. The description goes beyond these by disclosing exactly what is affected: the booking page stops working immediately, and existing appointments are not cancelled. This is valuable behavioral context about the consequences of the destructive action that annotations do not provide.

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 three short sentences with no redundancy. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the two following sentences add essential consequences 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?

For a single-parameter destructive operation with annotations covering the safety profile and an output schema present, the description covers the key behavioral outcomes: immediate deactivation of the booking page and preservation of existing appointments. No critical information for invoking the tool correctly is missing.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explicitly explain the meetingTypeId parameter. However, the phrase 'Delete a meeting type' implies that the sole parameter identifies the meeting type to delete, adding relational meaning beyond the schema's bare string type. It still does not elaborate on how to obtain or validate the ID, so the compensation is partial.

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 uses the specific verb 'Delete' with the resource 'a meeting type' and then clarifies the scope by stating that its booking page stops working immediately and existing appointments are not cancelled. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_meeting_type, update_meeting_type, get_meeting_type, and list_meeting_types.

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 provides contextual behavior - the booking page stops working and existing appointments are not cancelled - which implies it is for permanently removing a meeting type without affecting current appointments. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool, leaving the agent to infer that cancel_appointment or update_meeting_type might serve other needs.

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