km_delete_macro

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

Warns that deletion cannot be undone, a key behavioral trait. However, with no annotations, it should also disclose potential side effects (e.g., cascading deletions) or permission requirements; these are absent.

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?

Two sentences with no unnecessary words; the warning is concise and impactful. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

Adequate for a simple delete tool with one parameter and no output schema, but lacks information on error handling (e.g., if macro not found) or implications on other macros.

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 already covers the parameter meaning ('Macro name or UID to delete'), and the tool description mirrors this without adding new semantics. High schema coverage (100%) yields baseline score.

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?

Clearly states the action (delete) and resource (macro), with explicit identifier options (name or UID). Differentiates from sibling tools like km_create_macro or km_clone_macro.

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?

Includes a warning about irreversibility, which guides careful usage, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or mention prerequisites.

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