delete_downloadclient_bulk

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the destructive nature is covered. The description adds no further behavioral details such as what gets deleted, irreversibility, or side effects. The only addition is the endpoint and a generic payload note, which provides minimal extra value beyond the 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 short and front-loaded with the purpose, then the endpoint, then the args. It is efficient with no filler. It is appropriately concise, though it may be too minimal given the complexity of the operation.

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?

The description lacks critical context: it does not clarify that this is a bulk operation (though the name implies it), does not mention the response format, and provides insufficient guidance on constructing the payload beyond a generic pointer. Given the open schema (additionalProperties true), the agent may not know what to send. It also does not differentiate from delete_downloadclient_by_id, leaving room for confusion.

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 has one parameter 'body' with no description (0% coverage). The description advises 'Read the matching GET or the /schema endpoint first to see the fields this resource expects,' which is a useful pointer for discovering the expected structure. However, it does not specify that the payload likely contains an array of IDs or any concrete fields, so the agent still must consult another endpoint to construct a valid request.

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.' which is a clear verb+resource pair. However, it does not explicitly mention 'bulk' or differentiate from the sibling delete_downloadclient_by_id, though the name and endpoint include 'bulk'. The purpose is evident but lacks explicit sibling differentiation.

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 bulk delete versus the single delete or other bulk operations. The description does not mention alternatives, exclusions, or context for when this tool is appropriate, leaving the agent to infer from the name.

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