delete_segment

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

The description adds context beyond annotations: it specifies that the deletion includes historic versions and requires user confirmation. Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, but the description elaborates on the scope and safety protocol.

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 with three distinct parts: a structured header with emoji, the core action, and a usage instruction. Every sentence serves a purpose without redundancy.

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 operation with one parameter, the description covers the essential behavioral aspects (version deletion, confirmation). It does not describe the return value, but the absence of an output schema makes that optional. Nearly complete.

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 describes the single parameter 'segmentId' with an example and short description. Since schema description coverage is 100%, the description does not need to add parameter details, and it does not. 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 verb 'Delete', the resource 'Segment', and the scope 'including its historic versions'. The prefix '🔴 DESTRUCTIVE · deletes data · Segments' immediately conveys the action, distinguishing it from other delete tools among siblings.

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 an instruction to 'Confirm with the user before calling', which provides a usage precaution. However, it does not compare this tool to alternatives (e.g., when to delete vs. archive, or other delete endpoints). The guidance is basic but present.

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