oncofiles

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 this is a deletion operation, implying it's destructive, but doesn't mention permissions, reversibility, side effects, or confirmation steps. For a destructive tool, this is insufficient to ensure safe usage by an AI agent.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a clear parameter explanation in a structured format. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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 destructive nature, no annotations, and an output schema (which may cover return values), the description is minimally adequate. It explains the action and parameter but lacks critical behavioral details like safety warnings or error handling, making it incomplete for confident use.

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%, but the description compensates by explaining the single parameter ('event_id: The treatment event ID to delete'), adding meaning beyond the bare schema. However, it doesn't specify format constraints (e.g., valid ID ranges or sources), leaving minor gaps.

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 ('treatment event by ID'), making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'delete_document' or 'update_treatment_event', 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 some usage context ('Use for removing contaminated/test data'), which implies when to use it, but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use it or alternatives (e.g., vs. updating or archiving). No sibling tool comparisons are mentioned, leaving gaps in decision-making.

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