delete_users_syncs_by_id

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

Annotations already carry the destructive and non-read-only signals, and the description reinforces this with 'Undo.' It adds useful scoping context ('scoped to the authenticated user') and a numeric-vs-non-numeric segment behavior, though the non-numeric part is ambiguous and potentially misleading.

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, front-loaded with the purpose, and clearly structures the endpoint and argument. The confusing non-numeric sentence is the main structural flaw, preventing a perfect score.

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 single-parameter delete operation with output schema present and destructive/idempotent annotations available, the description provides enough to invoke the tool: endpoint, purpose, parameter scope, and one-parameter semantics. It could be improved by clarifying what 'undo a data sync' affects, but the core information is present.

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 must carry the parameter meaning, and it does identify id as a numeric sync id scoped to the authenticated user. However, the statement that a non-numeric segment is the filtered list conflicts with the required integer schema and is not actionable, so the compensation is incomplete.

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 opens with a concrete action, 'Undo a data sync,' and explicitly shows the DELETE /users/syncs/{id} endpoint, so the resource and operation are clear. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling sync tools such as get_users_syncs_by_id or delete_sync_playback_by_id, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool over alternatives, no prerequisites or exclusions, and no mention of related list/update/delete sync tools. The scoping note about the authenticated user is parameter context, not usage guidance.

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