passgage_delete_shift

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only states the literal deletion action but does not mention whether deletion is permanent, irreversible, requires authentication, or affects related records. This is a significant gap for a destructive 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 one short sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource, and contains no unnecessary words. It is appropriately concise for a simple delete operation.

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 simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema), the description adequately explains what it does and how to invoke it. It is complete enough for the basic use case, though it lacks depth in behavioral context, which is already penalized in that dimension.

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 has 100% description coverage for the single parameter 'id' as 'The UUID of the shift to delete'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, 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 shift by ID' clearly states the action (delete), the resource (shift), and the method (by ID). It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_shift, update_shift, get_shift, and list_shifts by indicating deletion.

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 a shift needs to be deleted), but it does not explicitly state alternatives or conditions such as 'use update_shift to modify instead' or mention prerequisites like existing shift must exist. Context is implied but not detailed.

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