delete_picklist_option

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the tool's scope and the 'disabled for safety' status, which is valuable, but it does not elaborate on consequences such as irreversibility, impact on existing records, or permission requirements. This leaves gaps for a delete 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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that effectively communicates the action, scope, and safety status. No wasted words; the parenthetical 'currently disabled for safety' is important and elegantly placed.

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 that there is no output schema and the tool is a delete operation, the description is somewhat thin. It lacks information about return values, error behavior, or side effects. The safety warning adds context, but the description could be more complete by noting irreversibility or impact on dependent data.

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 schema provides complete descriptions for all five parameters, including mutual exclusivity constraints. The description adds no new parameter-level semantics beyond the 'Local or Global' distinction, which is already implicitly covered by the schema. Baseline of 3 applies because schema coverage is 100%.

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 ('Remove') and the resource ('option from a Local or Global OptionSet'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like add_picklist_option, update_picklist_option, and get_picklist_options. The scope is explicit, leaving no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 gives clear context for when the tool is applicable (removing options from Local or Global OptionSets) and importantly warns that it is currently disabled for safety, which serves as a when-not-to-use directive. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives like update_picklist_option or mention prerequisites.

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