delete_records

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states the core delete action and return value but omits critical context for a destructive operation: irreversibility, permissions required, or effects on dependent data. This is a significant gap for a delete 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 extremely concise, front-loaded with the primary action, and uses a clear Args/Returns structure with no wasted words.

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 one-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers the basics, but it fails to mention permanent consequences or any caveats typically expected for deletion tools. This leaves the description functional but incomplete for safe 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 only provides the type (array of strings) and title, with zero description coverage. The description adds that these are 'record IDs to delete', providing minimal semantic meaning beyond the schema. This is adequate for a simple parameter but not richly compensating.

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 records'), the target resource ('from the REDCap project by record ID'), and distinguishes it from sibling delete tools like delete_file and delete_instrument by specifying 'records'.

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 implicitly conveys when to use this tool (when deleting record-level data by ID) and the context distinguishes it from other delete operations, but it does not explicitly name alternatives or mention when not to use it.

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