pbi_delete_page

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the operation is destructive, requires confirm=true, and will refuse to delete the last page because a report without pages cannot open. It also notes it updates page order and active page, which are useful side-effect behaviors.

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 brief and front-loaded with the main action. Every sentence adds value: the operation, its side effects, safety requirements, and a key edge case. No wasted 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 destructive tool with an output schema, the description provides enough context: the action, confirmation requirement, and edge case protection. It does not detail the output, but that is covered by the output schema. It could mention the behavior when confirm is false, but overall it is sufficiently 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the confirm parameter's role ('requiere confirm=true') and implies the 'page' parameter is the page to delete, but it does not clarify the format of 'page' or mention 'request_id'. This partial compensation earns a 3.

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 'Elimina' (deletes) and the resource 'una pagina' (a page), and also mentions it updates the order and active page. This distinguishes it from related sibling tools like pbi_duplicate_page or pbi_rename_page.

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 provides clear context: it is destructive and requires confirm=true, and it refuses to delete the last page. However, it does not explicitly mention alternative tools or scenarios when not to use this tool, so it falls short of a 5.

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