Delete a service dependency

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

Annotations already mark this as destructive and not read-only. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond them: it requires operator write opt-in and confirm:true, and warns that the operation may notify recipients or change tenant data. This is exactly the kind of side-effect disclosure an agent needs.

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 dense but well-ordered: purpose, method/path, body clarification, reference, then required authorization and side effects. Every sentence earns its place and there is no filler.

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 destructive mutation with no output schema, it covers the identifier, authentication prerequisite, confirmation requirement, and side effects. It does not describe response codes or failure semantics, but that is not essential for correctly selecting and invoking this DELETE 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 already documents confirm and query well, and the description clarifies that body fields are none. The endpoint template adds meaning for path.id. The only minor gap is not stating where confirm is transmitted, but the schema's required const true is sufficient for correct MCP invocation.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Delete a service dependency', reinforced by the exact DELETE endpoint. This unambiguously distinguishes it from sibling tools like create/modify_a_service_dependency and delete_a_service.

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 preconditions such as operator write opt-in and confirm:true, which is useful operational guidance. However, it does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus modifying or deleting other resources; the appropriate usage is only implied by the name and endpoint.

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