delete_customer

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only says 'Delete a customer' without indicating whether this is a hard delete, whether it's irreversible, what happens on missing id, or any side effects. The lack of such disclosure is a significant gap for a destructive operation.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It is concise and to the point, though it could benefit from additional context without becoming verbose.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema (not shown), the return value might be covered there, but the description does not explain error behavior, permanence, or prerequisites. For a delete operation, this is incomplete—especially without annotations to carry the safety profile.

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 schema fully describes customer_id with 100% coverage. The description adds no extra meaning beyond 'by their id', which is redundant. Since schema coverage is high, the baseline of 3 applies, but the description contributes nothing beyond that.

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 the verb 'Delete', the resource 'customer', and the method 'by their id'. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools (list, get, create, update) by specifying the destructive action.

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 usage is implied by the verb 'Delete' but there is no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives, nor any mention of prerequisites or consequences. For example, it doesn't say 'use this to permanently remove a customer' or 'this cannot be undone'.

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