delete_record

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool deletes a record, implying a destructive mutation, but fails to mention critical details like whether deletion is permanent, requires specific permissions, triggers cascading effects, or returns confirmation data. This leaves significant gaps for a mutation tool.

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 a single, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly. Every word earns its place in conveying the essential function.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (destructive mutation with 2 parameters) and the presence of an output schema (which may cover return values), the description is minimally adequate but incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral traits, parameter usage, and safety considerations, which are crucial for a delete operation, though the output schema might mitigate some gaps.

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 schema provides no parameter details. The description adds minimal semantics by implying 'model' and 'record_id' identify what to delete, but it doesn't explain what an 'Odoo model' is, valid model names, or how record IDs are obtained. This partial compensation justifies a baseline score.

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 action ('Delete') and resource ('a record from an Odoo model'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't distinguish this tool from potential alternatives like 'update_record' or 'create_record' in terms of destructive intent, which prevents a perfect score.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'update_record' or 'create_record', nor does it mention prerequisites (e.g., authentication, permissions) or warn about irreversible deletion. It's a basic statement of function without contextual usage advice.

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