passgage_delete_job_position

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 only states 'Delete a job_position by ID' and does not reveal whether deletion is permanent, irreversible, cascades to related records, requires specific permissions, or what happens if the ID does not exist. This is a significant transparency gap for a mutation operation.

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, front-loaded sentence with no superfluous words. It immediately communicates the action, resource, and method, earning its place without repetition or filler.

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 one-parameter delete tool, the description is minimally adequate, but it lacks any information about return values, success/error behavior, or side effects. Since there is no output schema and no annotations, the agent must infer these from the tool name alone, leaving notable gaps for a real-world invocation.

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 provides a complete description for the 'id' parameter ('The UUID of the job_position to delete'), giving 100% schema coverage. The description's 'by ID' aligns with the schema but adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 'Delete a job_position by ID' clearly states the specific action (delete), the resource (job_position), and the method (by ID). This unambiguously distinguishes it from sibling tools like create, update, get, and list for the same resource.

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 implies when to use the tool (when deleting a job_position by ID) but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it, such as alternatives like deactivating via update or checking for dependencies. The sibling tool names make the primary use case obvious, but no exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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