delete_reminder

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 that deletion is permanent, requires the exact name, and returns True/False based on whether the reminder was found and deleted. This covers key behavior, though it does not mention idempotency, errors, or side effects beyond deletion.

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 highly concise: one primary action sentence, followed by a structured Args/Returns section. Every sentence provides value, with no redundant or vague phrasing. It is front-loaded with the essential purpose.

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 simple two-parameter deletion tool, the description covers the action, parameters, and return behavior. It also notes the permanence of the delete operation. The presence of an output schema does not reduce the need here, as the description already explains return values. There are no gaps in understanding how to invoke this tool.

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?

Since schema description coverage is 0%, the description must fully explain the parameters. It does: 'name' is described as the exact name of the reminder, and 'list_name' is described as an optional narrow search. This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's simple field names.

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 opens with 'Delete a reminder permanently,' which clearly states the action and target resource. This distinguishes the tool from siblings like create_reminder, update_reminder, and complete_reminder by using the specific verb 'delete' and noting permanence.

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 gives clear context for when to use the tool: when you want to permanently remove a reminder. It also explains the optional 'list_name' parameter as a way to narrow the search, guiding usage. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like 'complete_reminder,' so it misses a full when-not-to-use explanation.

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