Delete Provider

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint: true and readOnlyHint: false. The description adds 'permanently,' which discloses irreversibility—a behavioral nuance not covered by annotations. It also clarifies the deletion is by id, aligning with the schema. No contradiction.

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 six-word sentence, front-loaded with the action and target. It is succinct and contains no unnecessary words, earning a perfect score.

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 operation with full schema coverage and strong annotations, the description is largely complete. It covers the action, target, and permanence. It omits output details, but the lack of an output schema makes this a minor gap.

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 covers 100% of parameters, with provider_id described as 'The provider id to delete.' The description's 'by id' adds no meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 'Permanently delete a provider by id' uses a specific verb ('delete') and clearly identifies the resource ('provider'), adding 'permanently' to convey irreversibility. This distinguishes it from sibling CRUD tools like lyzr_update_provider and lyzr_get_provider.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions. Usage is implied by the name and description (delete provider), but there is no guidance comparing it to related operations like update or get.

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