conduyt_delete_report_schedule

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden alone. It usefully discloses that past deliveries remain downloadable until a 14-day expiry, which is real value for a delete operation. However, it omits whether the removal is reversible, what permissions are required, and what happens to scheduled future deliveries.

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 tightly written sentences with the primary action front-loaded and the retention caveat following. Nothing is wasted.

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 single-param delete tool, the description covers the core effect and a useful retention note. But the lone parameter goes undocumented and there's no confirmation of reversibility or permission needs, leaving an incomplete picture.

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?

There is one required parameter ('sid') with 0% schema coverage and no description. The description never mentions the identifier, so the agent gets no help understanding that 'sid' is the schedule ID to remove. A low-coverage single-param tool requires the description to compensate, and it does not.

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?

States a specific verb ('Remove') and resource ('a schedule'), so the agent knows exactly what the tool does. It doesn't distinguish itself from create/update/list schedule siblings, but the operation is unambiguous.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus update_report_schedule or list_report_schedules, and no stated prerequisites. The agent must infer the use case from the name alone.

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