delete_field

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It discloses that the tool 'mutates the input schema and drops data', which are key destructive aspects. It also notes the confirm=true requirement. It could further mention irreversibility or permission needs, but the core behavior is well communicated.

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 two sentences long, with the first sentence clearly stating the action and method, and the second adding critical usage context. Every word serves a purpose; no fluff or redundancy.

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 simplicity and the presence of a detailed input schema with parameter descriptions, the description covers purpose, usage, and behavioral effects completely. The output schema exists (not shown but noted) so return values are not needed in the description.

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 input schema already includes descriptions for all parameters (fields, confirm, dataset). The description reinforces the confirm parameter's necessity and adds the context that system-required fields cannot be deleted. This provides additional clarity beyond the schema alone.

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 one or more fields') and the resource ('feature class or table'), using a specific verb and noun. It also references the underlying ArcPy function, providing precision. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_field or calculate_field.

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 explicit context: 'Use this only when unwanted attribute columns should be permanently removed.' This tells the agent when to choose this tool. It also mentions the confirm=true requirement. However, it does not explicitly list alternatives or situations where it should not be used.

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