Delete Features

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

The description correctly identifies the destructive nature of the tool, which aligns with the 'destructiveHint' annotation. It adds context about the two filtering methods, but does not disclose further behavioral traits such as permanence, cascading effects, or what happens if no features match.

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, direct sentence that first states the purpose then adds the key constraint. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy.

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 delete operation with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the selection methods but omits details like the necessity of 'layer_id' and potential return values (e.g., count of deleted features). It is minimally adequate but not rich.

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 bears the full burden. It clarifies the mutual exclusivity of 'fids' and 'expression' and their types, but fails to describe the required 'layer_id' parameter at all. This omission leaves a significant gap for the agent.

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 features') and the resource, specifying two distinct methods (by IDs or expression). This effectively distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'add_features' or 'update_features'.

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 provides constraints on usage ('Provide either fids or expression, not both'), but lacks guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives like 'select_features' or 'update_features'. No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use context is given.

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