catia_delete_parameter

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, and the description's verb 'Delete' aligns with that. The description adds no extra behavioral context such as irreversibility, permissions required, or effects on dependent relations. Since the destructive nature is already captured by annotations, the description contributes minimal additional transparency; however, there is no contradiction, so a baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 a single, compact sentence: 'Delete a user parameter.' It is front-loaded with the action and object, contains zero filler words, and is appropriately sized for the tool's simplicity. Every word earns its place; no unnecessary details or redundancies exist.

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 that the tool has only one parameter, no output schema, and no nested objects, the description covers the essential action. The destructive hint is provided via annotations, and the target (user parameter) is clearly stated. It could potentially mention that the parameter is deleted from the active document, but that is reasonably implied by the tool's context and sibling tools. The description is sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 100%, meaning the only parameter 'name' is fully documented in the input schema as 'Parameter name.' The description does not add any further detail about the parameter's format, valid values, or relationship to the document. With full schema coverage, the baseline of 3 applies; the description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides.

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 'Delete a user parameter.' states a clear action (delete) on a specific resource (user parameter). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like catia_get_parameter, catia_set_parameter, catia_create_parameter, and catia_list_parameters, all of which perform different operations on parameters. The verb-resource pair is explicit and unambiguous.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention preconditions (e.g., the parameter must exist), when not to use it, or how it differs from deleting a constraint or element. There is no context about the active document or scope. For a simple tool this may be acceptable, but the definition offers no explicit usage direction.

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