clm_shipment_command_delete_shipment_comment

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

The destructiveHint annotation already signals deletion/destruction, but the description adds no further behavioral context such as irreversibility, cascading effects, permissions needed, or whether the comment must exist. It simply restates the operation without enriching what the annotation already conveys.

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, direct sentence that is immediately understandable. It contains no filler, repetition, or unnecessary detail, and the core verb and object are front-loaded.

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?

Although the tool is simple and has an output schema, the description omits crucial context about the meaning of ItemId and any selection guidance. An agent has enough information to know deletion happens but not enough to confidently identify the correct comment target or know when deletion is appropriate.

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%, and the description does not explain the ItemId parameter at all. The schema only provides the name, type, and default, leaving ambiguity about whether ItemId refers to the shipment ID or the comment ID. Since the description fails to compensate for the low coverage, the parameter semantics are under-specified.

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 the action ('Deletes') and the resource ('an existing shipment comment'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like clm_shipment_command_create_shipment_comment and clm_shipment_command_update_shipment_comment. Even without reading the schema, an agent can tell what operation this tool performs.

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 gives no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_shipment_comments, create_shipment_comment, or update_shipment_comment. There is no mention of prerequisites, how to obtain the comment ID, or when deletion is appropriate.

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