Remove Contact Property

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

With no annotations, the description takes full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It clearly states the action is irreversible and will remove the property from all contacts. However, it does not cover edge cases like what happens if the property ID is invalid or the property does not exist, which would be useful for transparency.

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 somewhat long but each sentence serves a purpose: stating the action, requiring double-check, referencing the key, warning about irreversibility, and mandating confirmation. It is front-loaded with the action and then provides necessary instructions, making it efficient despite its length.

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 simplicity of the tool (one required parameter, no output schema), the description covers the main behavioral aspect (irreversibility) and safety requirements. It does not explain return values or error handling, but for a delete operation, the key information is present. It is nearly complete for the tool's context.

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 covers 100% of parameters with a description for contactPropertyId. The tool description adds minimal extra meaning: it mentions 'by ID' and 'Reference the KEY,' but does not explain what a contact property ID is or how to obtain it. This is adequate but does not significantly enhance the schema.

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 'Remove a contact property by ID from Resend,' specifying the verb (remove), resource (contact property), and method (by ID). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create-contact-property, update-contact-property, and list-contact-properties, which have different purposes.

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 explicit usage guidelines: must double-check with the user, reference the KEY when double-checking, warn about irreversibility, and only use after explicit confirmation. This leaves no ambiguity about when and how to use the tool safely.

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