delete_breakpoints

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the basic deletion action. It does not disclose potential side effects, error conditions, or irreversibility of deleting all breakpoints. Adequate but not thorough.

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 one focused sentence plus a brief parameter note. It front-loads the action and avoids unnecessary words.

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?

The description fails to mention the return value or any output, despite an output schema existing. It also omits error handling or effects of invalid parameters. For a simple delete tool, this lack of completeness reduces usability.

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 description explains the 'number' parameter (meaning and default behavior), adding value beyond the schema. However, the required 'session_id' parameter is not mentioned at all. With 0% schema coverage, this partial explanation is insufficient.

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 tool deletes breakpoints, specifying 'one or all', and references GDB 'delete' for context. It is unambiguous and distinct from sibling tools like 'breakpoint' (which sets breakpoints).

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 explicitly states when to use the tool (to delete breakpoints, individually or all). No exclusions or alternatives are needed as the only related sibling is for setting breakpoints.

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