templates_delete

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It reveals the operation is destructive (DELETE), requires explicit confirmation (confirm=true), and is gated by an environment variable. This provides good transparency. Missing details on idempotency but acceptable for 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?

One sentence with a clear [DELETE] prefix. Every word adds value: action, resource, prerequisites. No wasted text. Front-loaded for quick scanning.

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?

For a 5-param delete tool with no output schema, the description covers the core: what it does and safety requirements. It lacks return value info but is sufficient for an agent to invoke 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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description only mentions the confirm parameter's requirement, which is already in schema. No additional semantic guidance is provided for other parameters.

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 it deletes a GTM template, with a specific verb and resource. The [DELETE] prefix and explicit 'Delete a GTM template' make the purpose unambiguous, distinguishing it from siblings like templates_create or templates_revert.

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 specifies when to use (to delete a template) and provides requirements (environment variable and confirm flag). However, it does not differentiate from similar tools like templates_revert, which might be confused with deletion. This is a minor gap.

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