delete_downloadclient_by_id

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, and the description's 'Delete' is consistent; there is no contradiction. However, the description adds little beyond what the annotations and endpoint already communicate, so the added behavioral context is minimal.

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 very short and to the point, with no obvious filler. The REST endpoint and Args lines are somewhat redundant with the schema and URL, but the overall structure is scannable and efficient.

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?

This is a simple single-parameter DELETE operation, with annotations covering destructiveness/idempotence and an output schema present. The description gives an agent enough to call it, though it omits explicit side-effect or alternative-tool 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description needs to clarify the id parameter. It only says 'id: Path parameter,' which is already evident from the URL and doesn't explain that the id identifies the download client to delete, though the resource name makes this mostly inferable.

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 a clear verb and resource ('Delete DownloadClient') and shows the REST path. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from delete_downloadclient_bulk, but the name and endpoint make the single-resource target inferable.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as delete_downloadclient_bulk, nor any prerequisites like the client not being in use. The agent is left to infer usage context from the tool name alone.

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