reminders_delete

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it does disclose the single most important trait: deletion is permanent and cannot be undone. It says nothing about permissions, what happens if the uid does not exist, or whether deletion affects the containing list, leaving meaningful gaps for a destructive mutation.

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?

Two short sentences with zero waste; the destructive consequence is stated immediately after the action, which is the correct front-loading for a delete tool.

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 two-parameter tool with no output schema or annotations, the description covers the action and its irreversibility adequately. It falls short on the undocumented list_name parameter and on error behavior for a nonexistent uid, both of which an agent would want before calling a destructive tool.

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 compensate and it only partially does: 'by uid' implicitly identifies uid as the reminder key. The optional list_name parameter is never mentioned, leaving an agent to guess whether it scopes or disambiguates the deletion.

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 states a specific verb (delete) and resource (reminder) with the identifier (uid), which clearly separates it from siblings like reminders_update and reminders_create. It stops short of explicitly naming or contrasting those siblings, so it lands at a clear-but-undifferentiated 4.

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?

There is no guidance on when to delete versus when to use an alternative such as reminders_update or marking an item complete. The irreversible wording hints at caution but gives no conditional or alternative routing, which is exactly what an agent choosing among 10 siblings needs.

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