passgage_delete_user_extra_work

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It only states 'Delete' but does not disclose whether deletion is irreversible, affects related data, requires specific permissions, or returns any confirmation. 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 a single, clear sentence with no filler. It is appropriately sized for a simple one-parameter delete tool and front-loads the action.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It does not mention success/failure behavior, return values, or potential side effects. Even though the tool is simple, the missing information could lead to incorrect invocation or misunderstanding.

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 100% and the parameter's description already explains the ID is the UUID of the entity to delete. The tool description simply restates 'by ID' without adding any extra semantic nuance, so the baseline score 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 clearly states a specific verb ('Delete') and a specific resource ('user_extra_work') identifiable by ID. It unambiguously distinguishes this tool from sibling CRUD operations like get, create, and update on 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 usage: when you want to permanently remove a user_extra_work by its ID. However, it gives no explicit context, prerequisites, or alternatives, and does not mention when not to use it (e.g., if the record is referenced elsewhere).

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