delete_a_record

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

The description explicitly marks the tool as destructive and advises user confirmation, adding behavioral context beyond the annotations (which already include destructiveHint=true). It does not contradict any annotations.

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, front-loading the destructive marker and endpoint, but contains slight redundancy ('Delete a record by id' followed by 'Deletes a record'). It efficiently conveys the essential information.

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 tool with annotations, the description adequately explains the action and provides a warning. It does not discuss return values (no output schema) or idempotency, but these are covered by annotations and the simplicity of the operation.

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 input schema covers both parameters with clear descriptions ('ID of record', 'ID of schema'), and schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool deletes a record by id, specifies the HTTP method and endpoint, and includes a destructive marker. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on 'Custom Objects' records, as indicated by the endpoint path.

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 includes a warning to 'Confirm with the user before calling,' which provides some usage guidance. However, it does not explain when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'delete_a_record_by_external_id' or other delete tools for different entities.

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