delete_a_tag

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

Annotations already provide destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds the emoji 'DESTRUCTIVE' and the phrase 'deletes data', reinforcing the destructive nature. It also instructs to confirm with the user, which adds context beyond annotations. No contradictions are present.

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 extremely concise, consisting of a single emoji line and two short sentences. Every element serves a clear purpose: the emoji signals destructiveness, the HTTP method indicates the endpoint, and the instruction to confirm is actionable. No unnecessary words.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose, parameter name, and a safety instruction. It does not mention return values or error handling, but given the tool's simplicity and the annotations, it is largely sufficient.

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 has 100% coverage with a single 'id' parameter described as 'ID of the tag to remove'. The description does not add any additional meaning or format details beyond the schema. Since schema coverage is high, a baseline 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 'Delete a Tag' and 'Deletes a record', specifying the verb and resource. The emoji and HTTP method prefix reinforce the destructive action, making the purpose unambiguous. While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'remove_a_contacts_tag', the name and description make the tool's specific function distinct.

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 advises 'Confirm with the user before calling', which provides a safety guideline for usage. However, it does not mention when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'remove_a_contacts_tag') or provide exclusions. The implied context is that it's for deleting tags directly, but no explicit comparisons to siblings are given.

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