prom_saved_search_delete

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It says what is deleted but not that the deletion is permanent, whether it requires auth, or whether it affects an active/running saved search. For a destructive operation with zero annotation coverage this is a real gap.

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?

A single efficient sentence with the verb front-loaded and no filler. It is terse to the point of under-specification, but nothing in it is wasted.

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?

A destructive tool with no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented parameter needs more than one sentence. The description leaves the agent without the id's origin, irreversibility, or error behavior.

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?

One parameter (id) with 0% schema description coverage and no prose explanation in the description — the agent gets no hint about the id's format or origin (e.g. from prom_saved_search_list). The description adds no meaning beyond the schema's type and minLength.

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?

States a specific verb (Delete) plus resource (saved Prom.ua search), which cleanly separates it from the sibling create/list/run saved-search tools. It does not explicitly name or route against those siblings, but the action is 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?

No when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or prerequisite guidance. Nothing tells the agent whether the id must come from prom_saved_search_list, or that this is irreversible.

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