Delete a decision training example

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds that the HTTP method is DELETE and that authorization class is 'board_or_agent', which adds context beyond annotations. However, it does not disclose any side effects, such as whether the deletion cascades or affects other data.

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 very short (two sentences) and to the point, with no superfluous content. It could be improved by adding more context without becoming verbose.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description does not mention what the tool returns. It lacks usage context, parameter details, and behavioral nuance. Given the many sibling tools, this minimal description may lead to confusion.

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 50%, and the description adds no explanation of the parameters. The 'path.id' is implied by the URL but not described, and the optional 'body' parameter is not clarified on when it should be used.

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 title and description clearly state the verb ('Delete') and the resource ('a decision training example'), making the purpose unambiguous. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like pc_patch_decision_training_by_id or pc_get_decision_training_by_id, which also operate on the same resource.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites or conditions for use. For a delete operation, it is expected to at least note that the example must exist and that deletion is irreversible, but this is absent.

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