Delete a plan

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

Beyond the annotations (destructiveHint:true), the description adds specifics: 'may notify recipients or change tenant data' and 'Requires operator write opt-in and confirm:true'. These disclose side effects and prerequisites not fully captured by annotations or schema, enhancing 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 concise, front-loading the purpose, then providing the endpoint, reference, and critical prerequisites in a single sentence. Every element adds value with no redundancy.

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 operation with no output schema, the description includes essential context: endpoint, reference, prerequisites, and side effects. It does not specify the response on success (e.g., 204), but this is minor given the absence of an output schema and the simplicity of the operation.

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 covers path.planId and confirm with descriptions, but the description adds 'Body fields: none' and the operator write opt-in requirement, which are not in the schema. With 67% schema coverage, this additional context helps agents understand the call parameters, though the query parameter remains generic.

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 states 'Delete a plan' clearly, specifying the verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling delete tools (e.g., delete_a_device, delete_a_group) by targeting the 'plan' resource, so an agent can select it unambiguously.

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 clear context for use: it is a delete operation for a specific plan, includes the endpoint, and notes prerequisites (operator write opt-in and confirm:true). It does not explicitly mention exclusions or alternatives, but the resource-based clarity makes when-to-use evident.

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