lpza_delete_draft_fee

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the safety burden, and it does disclose that this is a deletion and requires confirm: true. It adds context that only unbilled draft items are affected, but it does not state whether deletion is permanent/irreversible or what authorization is required.

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?

Two short sentences, with the key verb and object first. No filler; the implementation detail and guard are both meaningful.

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?

Although the core purpose and the confirm guard are present, the tool has three parameters and no output schema, and the schema only marks confirm as required, leaving ambiguous whether an identifier (srcid or matterdraftlineitem_uid) must also be supplied. The description does not clarify this or describe expected return/error behavior, which is a significant gap for a destructive operation.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the parameters are already named and described (srcid, confirm, matterdraftlineitem_uid). The description only repeats the confirm requirement and adds no new distinctions such as when to use srcid versus uid.

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 opens with 'Delete an unbilled draft fee or disbursement' — a specific verb and resource that clearly names the operation. This distinguishes it from sibling create/update/list tools, and the mention of 'matterdraftlineitem.quickdelete' identifies the exact mechanism.

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 phrase 'unbilled draft fee or disbursement' signals when the tool is appropriate and implicitly excludes billed items. It also warns that confirm: true is required, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives such as upsert_draft_fee or describe when a plain update is preferred.

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