AgentBots: Delete an AgentBot

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds real value on top: the exact auth requirement (Platform app API key in the `api-access-token` header) and an explicit statement that deletion is permanent. The trailing note about text/ID digit encodings is largely irrelevant here since the only parameter is an ID.

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?

Front-loaded with purpose, endpoint, auth and destructiveness — the operationally important facts come first. The Persian/Farsi digit sentence is boilerplate that earns little for a single-ID delete call, so it is slightly padded but not wasteful enough to hurt much.

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 one-parameter destructive delete with no output schema, the description covers purpose, endpoint, auth and irreversibility, which is nearly everything the agent needs. Missing only minor operational details such as behavior when the ID does not exist (e.g. 404).

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% for the single `id` parameter, so the baseline is 3; the description earns an extra point by disclosing that IDs may be supplied in Persian or Arabic-Indic digits, which is genuine input-format guidance the schema does not contain. It does not, however, correct the schema's misleading text that calls the ID 'the agentbot to be updated'.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('Delete an agent bot [AgentBots]') plus the concrete endpoint DELETE /platform/api/v1/agent_bots/{id}. That is unambiguous, though it never explicitly distinguishes itself from the near-identical sibling gapify_delete_agent_bot (the non-platform variant), leaving the agent to infer the platform/CLI split from the name.

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?

Usage is only implied: the word 'Delete' and the warning 'this permanently deletes the resource' tell the agent this is the removal path for an agent bot, but there is no explicit when-to-use statement, no prerequisites, and no reference to any alternative tool.

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