Delete schematic primitives

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

Annotations already indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-idempotent behavior (idempotentHint=false). The description adds the fact that deletion is by UUID, but does not disclose other behavioral traits such as error handling, reversibility, or cascading effects. It meets the baseline but adds limited extra value.

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?

A single sentence of 17 words conveys the action, target, and method without any fluff. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource, making it efficient for an AI agent to parse.

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) and clear annotations, the description is mostly complete for a delete operation. However, it omits mention of the confirmWrite boolean constraint, which is critical for writing. While the schema documents it, including it in the description would improve completeness for agent decision-making.

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 50%: confirmWrite is documented in schema, but primitiveIds lacks a schema-level description. The tool description adds that primitiveIds are UUIDs, which is valuable context. This compensates for the schema gap, earning a score above baseline.

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 it deletes schematic primitives by UUID, specifying the verb (delete), resource (schematic primitives), and method (by UUID). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like easyeda_schematic_modify_primitive, which modifies rather than deletes.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, it does not mention that this tool is for deletion while easyeda_schematic_modify_primitive is for modification, or any prerequisites or constraints.

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