delete_custom_field

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It says 'Delete' but does not mention that deletion is permanent, irreversible, or might fail if the field is in use. There is no mention of cascading effects or permissions required, which is critical for a destructive operation.

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 consists of two short sentences: the first states the action, and the second explains the parameter. It is front-loaded and concise, with no redundant wording or filler. Every word contributes meaning.

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 delete tool with no output schema, the description covers the basic operation and parameter semantics. However, it lacks the side-effect disclosure and usage context that would make it fully complete, especially since deletion is irreversible. The description is adequate but leaves important operational details undisclosed.

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 description adds semantic meaning beyond the schema by identifying field_id as a 'UUID of the custom field to delete.' This clarifies the expected format and role, which the schema alone (just type string) does not provide. Given the very low schema coverage, this compensation is valuable.

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 resource ('a custom field'), and it is distinct from sibling tools like create_custom_field, update_custom_field, and list_custom_fields. Even though the sibling list is not explicitly referenced, the verb+resource pairing makes the purpose unambiguous.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as update_custom_field or delete_vendor. There are no prerequisites, limitations, or contextual hints. For a deletion tool, one would expect at least a note that it is for removing an existing field rather than toggling or archiving.

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