Manager Delete

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

Beyond what annotations already declare (destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false), the description adds critical behavioral disclosures: deletion is permanent with no undo, the user must be confirmed first, and the deleted document is returned in the response so it can be re-created. This directly complements and enriches the annotation safety profile.

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 sentences, zero filler. The destructive action is front-loaded, followed immediately by the most decision-critical caveat (no undo) and the recovery mechanism (returned document). Every clause earns its place.

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?

With an output schema present and annotations covering destructiveness, the description covers the key behavioral caveats an agent needs to act safely. The main gap is parameter semantics, but that is accounted for separately; the tool's critical safety and recovery context is present.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the full burden of explaining parameters, but it does not clarify what 'resource', 'key', or 'business' mean or how they relate to the record being deleted. The term 'record' loosely maps to 'resource' but never explicitly, leaving the agent to guess parameter formats.

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 states a specific verb and resource — 'Delete a record permanently' — which clearly distinguishes it from siblings like manager_get, manager_create, and manager_update. The permanence qualifier adds important scope that separates it from any soft-delete or move-to-trash behavior.

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 clear operational context: because there is no undo, the agent must confirm with the user first. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the confirm-first instruction effectively routes the agent's decision-making around this irreversible action.

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