delete_exclusions_bulk

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, covering the safety profile. The description adds no extra behavioral context, such as effects on related data, permission requirements, or rate limits. It simply restates the action, offering minimal value beyond the structured annotations.

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 extremely brief with no filler. It front-loads the action, provides the endpoint, and then lists the argument. While minimal, it is appropriately sized for a simple delete operation, though it could benefit from a bit more detail without becoming verbose.

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 bulk delete, the description is thin. It does not explicitly state that it deletes multiple entries or how to specify them, relying on external endpoints for payload structure. Annotations cover safety, but the schema is unhelpful, so the description should compensate more. Given the output schema exists, return values are not a gap, but the input guidance is insufficient.

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 description provides meaningful guidance for the body parameter, advising to read the matching GET or /schema endpoint to understand expected fields. Since the schema has 0% coverage for the body property, this direction is valuable. However, it does not specify the expected structure (e.g., a list of IDs) for a bulk delete, leaving some ambiguity.

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 clearly states the action ('Delete') and resource ('ImportListExclusion'), which matches the tool name. The endpoint indicates bulk operation, but the description does not explicitly mention 'bulk', relying on the name and path for that distinction. It is distinguishable from delete_exclusions_by_id based on the bulk naming.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like delete_exclusions_by_id. There is no mention of prerequisites, conditions, or scenarios where bulk deletion is appropriate. The only advice is to read GET/schema endpoints, which is parameter discovery, not usage direction.

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