modx_clientconfig_delete_setting

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries full burden. For a destructive operation it says nothing about irreversibility, required permissions, or what happens when the setting does not exist—the only behavioral hint is the word "Delete".

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. It may be too terse for a destructive tool, but nothing is wasted.

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?

Given a destructive mutation with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter documentation, the description is too thin—it omits reversibility, error behavior, and the id/key contract the agent needs to invoke it safely.

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%, but the phrase "by id or key" usefully signals that either parameter is an acceptable lookup. It does not resolve the ambiguity left by both parameters being optional (what happens if neither or both are supplied, or precedence between them).

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Delete a ClientConfig setting") with the lookup mode ("by id or key"). It is clearly distinguishable from the list/get/create/update clientconfig siblings by the verb alone, though it never names those alternatives.

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 on when to use this versus modx_clientconfig_update_setting or modx_delete_system_setting, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. The agent must infer the usage context from the verb.

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