delete_cookbook

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Delete', implying a destructive operation, but does not elaborate on consequences (e.g., permanence, cascading deletes, or error conditions). The minimal text leaves significant behavioral ambiguity.

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, efficient sentence that immediately conveys the tool's purpose. While very concise, it lacks any structuring elements (e.g., bullet points) but is not overly verbose. It could be improved by adding a caveat about irreversibility.

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 simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema), the description is arguably adequate. However, for a delete operation, adding a note about permanence or required ownership would make it more complete and helpful for an AI agent.

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 must add meaning. It mentions 'by UUID', which clarifies the parameter's expected format, but provides no additional constraints or examples. The parameter name 'cookbook_id' already suggests it's an identifier, so the value added is minimal.

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 'Delete a cookbook by UUID' clearly states the action (delete), the resource (cookbook), and the identifier method (UUID). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_category or delete_food, which target different resources.

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it specify any prerequisites or conditions for use. It simply states the action without context.

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