discount_delete

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true. The description adds beyond annotations by explaining that deletion only prevents future use and that already-used discounts remain on past orders. This provides valuable behavioral context without contradicting 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 extremely concise, consisting of a single sentence that packs the action, endpoint, requirement, and important side effect. It is front-loaded and every word adds value.

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 the tool has 3 parameters and no output schema, the description adequately covers the key behavioral aspects: required force parameter and persistence of past orders. It does not cover error scenarios or response format, but these are not essential for basic invocation.

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 0% description coverage. The description adds meaning by stating that force must be true, which is not enforced by the schema (default false, not required). It does not explain site or discount_id, but those are self-explanatory in the context of discount deletion.

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 'Delete a discount' with the specific HTTP method and endpoint. It distinguishes this deletion tool from sibling tools like discount_create, discount_get, and discount_update by focusing on the deletion action and its side effects.

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 explains that force=true is required for deletion and clarifies that past orders are unaffected. While it does not explicitly state when to avoid using this tool, it provides enough context for an agent to understand the prerequisites and consequences.

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