delete_tracker

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries the burden: it explains the soft-delete nature, that call history is retained, new calls stop, the phone number is released, and the return format (object with deleted: True or empty on 204). This is comprehensive.

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 appropriately sized, starts with a concise summary, and uses a clear structured format for args and returns. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 has only 2 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema (which the description already covers), the description provides complete information about behavior, parameters, and return values. No gaps remain.

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 0% description coverage, but the description adds critical meaning: tracker_id format ('TRK...') and account_id's auto-resolution and optionality. This fully compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 verb 'Delete (disable)' and the resource 'tracker', and explains the soft-removal behavior. It effectively distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_tracker, get_tracker, update_tracker, and list_trackers.

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?

Provides detailed context on what happens (soft delete, keeps history, releases number) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like update_tracker for disabling. However, the behavioral details implicitly guide usage.

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