batch_delete

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and does well by disclosing the workflow steps, irreversible nature, and data loss risks. It mentions validation, API deletion, and internal tracking removal, though it doesn't cover error handling or authentication requirements.

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 well-structured with clear sections (workflow, use case, warning) and front-loaded key information. It's appropriately sized, though slightly verbose with the workflow details that could be condensed.

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 destructive tool with no annotations or output schema, the description provides good context about the irreversible operation, workflow, and use cases. It could improve by mentioning error conditions or response format, but it's largely complete for agent understanding.

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 one parameter clearly documented. The description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what's in the schema, so it meets the baseline of 3 for adequate coverage without extra value.

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 explicitly states the verb ('DELETE') and resource ('BATCH JOB'), and distinguishes it from siblings like batch_cancel or batch_download_results by specifying it's a permanent deletion operation. The title 'DELETE BATCH JOB' reinforces this clarity.

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 explicit usage guidance with 'USE CASE: Clean up completed/failed jobs, manage job history, free storage' and warns 'Recommended to download results before deletion.' It clearly differentiates from batch_download_results and batch_cancel by focusing on permanent cleanup.

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