delete_downloadclient_by_id

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and the description adds no behavioral context beyond that—no mention that deletion is permanent, affects related objects, or requires specific permissions. It merely restates the resource being acted upon.

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 short and front-loaded with the action, but it is under-specified. The HTTP path and an 'Args' section that merely restates the schema's id parameter take up space without adding meaningful content. It is concise but not effectively structured for tool selection.

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 operation with no annotations describing consequences, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what a DownloadClient is, what removal entails, or whether deletion is irreversible. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to describe return values, but the missing context around the action's implications remains a gap.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It only says 'id: Path parameter', identifying the parameter's location but not what the id represents (e.g., an integer identifier of a specific download client). This minimal information adds almost nothing over the schema's name and type.

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 DownloadClient' with the HTTP endpoint, making the verb and resource clear. It does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling delete_downloadclient_bulk, but the resource name uniquely identifies this operation.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as delete_downloadclient_bulk or update_downloadclient_by_id. It also omits any prerequisites, side effects, or conditions that might influence the decision to delete.

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