Delete Schedule

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

The annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds no additional behavioral context such as whether deletion is permanent, recoverable, or how it interacts with dependent resources. It merely restates the destructive nature already captured by annotations.

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 concise sentence of five words, front-loaded with the verb. Every word earns its place, and there is no redundant or filler content.

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 one-parameter delete tool with annotations covering safety/destructive profile, the description is minimally viable. However, it does not mention that deletion is permanent or note any side effects, and given the presence of sibling pause/resume tools, a brief note distinguishing delete from those would improve completeness. Overall, adequate but with a clear 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 single parameter schedule_id is documented only as a string in the schema with 0% description coverage. The description's phrase 'by id' minimally clarifies that the parameter is the identifier of the schedule to delete, but this is almost tautological given the parameter name. It does not add substantial semantic value beyond the schema.

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 'Delete a schedule by id' uses a specific verb ('delete') and resource ('schedule'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling scheduling tools like create, list, pause, or resume. It also names the key operand (id), making the tool's function 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 usage guidance is provided beyond the purpose itself. There is no mention of when to use delete versus alternatives such as pause/resume, nor any indication of prerequisites or consequences. The description simply states what it does, offering no explicit context for selection.

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