fields_bulk_delete_person_fields

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states input acceptance and normalization, but omits critical details like whether deletion is permanent, required permissions, error handling, or idempotency. For a mutation tool, this is insufficient.

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 concise with two sentences and a bullet-like list. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and uses no unnecessary words. Every sentence adds value.

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 tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description covers input shapes well. However, it lacks information on return format, success/error indicators, and preconditions (e.g., field existence). Some gaps remain for a fully self-contained description.

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% for the 'ids' parameter, providing baseline clarity. The description adds significant value by explaining the two accepted shapes and normalization behavior, which goes beyond the schema's technical constraints.

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 verb 'delete', the resource 'multiple custom person fields', and specifies it's a bulk operation. This distinguishes it from siblings like 'fields_delete_person_field' (single delete) and 'fields_bulk_delete_deal_fields' (different entity).

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., single delete). It lacks context on prerequisites, when not to use, or trade-offs. This leaves the agent uninformed about choosing the correct tool.

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