delete_golden_sql

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing destructive behavior. It explicitly mentions the destructive flag requirement, which implies the operation is permanent and guarded. This adds meaningful context beyond the tool name alone.

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?

Two short sentences, immediately stating the action and the key prerequisite. No filler or redundant information; every word earns its place.

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 delete operation with two clearly named parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential facts: what it does and the necessary environment setting. It could mention immediacy or side effects, but overall it is sufficiently complete for this tool's complexity.

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% and the description does not explain either parameter. While 'golden_sql_id' and 'knowledge_base_id' are inferable from names, the description adds no explicit meaning, failing to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 the resource ('a Golden SQL example'), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It also differentiates from siblings like add_golden_sql and list_golden_sql by the delete operation.

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 a clear behavioral prerequisite ('Requires BAIC_ALLOW_DESTRUCTIVE=true'), which is relevant for usage. While it doesn't explicitly contrast with alternatives, the scope is evident and no competing delete-golden-sql tool exists among siblings.

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