delete_entities

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It effectively discloses key behavioral traits: the tool performs a destructive operation ('Remove entirely'), specifies what gets deleted (entities and their memories via cascade), and identifies the types of entities affected. However, it lacks details on permissions, rate limits, or error conditions.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action and scope. Every word earns its place by specifying the verb, resources, and cascade effect without redundancy or unnecessary elaboration.

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, no annotations, and an output schema (which handles return values), the description is reasonably complete. It covers the purpose, scope, and cascade behavior, though it could benefit from more explicit warnings about irreversibility or usage guidelines relative to siblings.

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 100%, with each parameter documented in the schema. The description adds value by clarifying that parameters are mutually exclusive (implied by 'a user/agent/app/run record' singular) and that deletion cascades to memories, but does not provide additional syntax or format details beyond the schema.

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 specific action ('Remove entirely') and identifies the target resources ('user/agent/app/run record'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like delete_memory or delete_all_memories. It also specifies the cascade effect on memories, which adds important context about the scope of deletion.

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 implies usage for permanent removal of entities with memory cascading, but does not explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives like delete_memory (for individual memories) or delete_all_memories (for all memories without entity deletion). No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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