delete_stack_frame_variable

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 the tool deletes a variable, implying a destructive mutation, but doesn't clarify if this is permanent, reversible, requires specific permissions, or what happens on success/failure. This leaves significant gaps for a mutation tool.

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 directly states the tool's action without unnecessary words. It's front-loaded with the key verb 'Delete', making it easy to parse, though it could be slightly more structured for clarity.

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 complexity as a destructive mutation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It doesn't explain behavioral aspects like effects, error handling, or return values, leaving the agent with incomplete information for safe and effective use.

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?

The schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters ('function_address' and 'variable_name') adequately. The description mentions 'named stack variable' and 'given function', which aligns with the schema but doesn't add significant meaning beyond it, justifying the baseline score.

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 action ('Delete') and the target ('the named stack variable for a given function'), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'rename_stack_frame_variable' or 'set_stack_frame_variable_type', which involve similar resources but different operations.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as 'rename_stack_frame_variable' or 'set_stack_frame_variable_type', nor does it mention prerequisites like needing an existing variable. It lacks context for selection among sibling tools.

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