delete_currency

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the operation fails conditionally (if in use), which is critical behavioral info. It lacks details on auth, rate limits, or success response, but for a delete, the provided failure conditions are sufficient.

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 sentences, no filler. Purpose is first, followed by failure conditions and endpoint. 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 with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose, endpoint, and failure conditions. It could mention success response (e.g., HTTP 204), but that is often implied. Mostly complete.

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 coverage is 100% with a description 'Company currency ID (required)'. The description adds only the URL pattern and route, which is marginal beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 explicitly states 'Delete a company currency' and provides the HTTP method and endpoint, clearly distinguishing it from create, update, and get currency tools. The action and resource are 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?

The description implies when NOT to use it by noting it fails if the currency is in use (invoices, subscriptions, etc.), but does not provide explicit alternatives or a clear 'when to use' statement. However, the context is clear enough for most agents.

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