Remove Topic

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals that removal is irreversible and mandates a confirmation step, which is critical for a delete operation. However, it does not mention potential side effects on related data (e.g., contacts, segments) or the response format, though irreversibility is the most important trait.

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 three sentences: the first states the purpose, and the next two provide essential safety instructions. Every sentence earns its place, and the purpose is front-loaded. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 destructive tool (1 parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the key risks (irreversibility, user confirmation) and provides clear operational guidance. It does not explain cascading effects or return values, but these are less critical given the tool's simplicity and the strong safety focus.

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 100% (the only parameter 'id' has description 'Topic ID'), so the schema already documents the parameter. The description merely repeats 'by ID' without adding format, source, or usage details beyond the schema, justifying the baseline score of 3.

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 topic by ID from Resend,' providing a specific verb (remove), resource (topic), and scope (by ID). This distinguishes it from sibling remove-* tools which target other resources, and from other topic tools (create/update/get/list).

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 explicit usage guidance: 'Before using this tool, you MUST double-check with the user' and 'You may only use this tool if the user explicitly confirms.' This clearly states when the tool may and may not be used, effectively serving as a usage gate for a destructive operation.

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