list_deleted_parties

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It reveals that the response includes a `restrictedParties` key, indicating partial access for some records. However, it does not explicitly state that it is a read-only operation or disclose potential side effects, though the name implies read.

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: two sentences that front-load the purpose and then add a critical usage note and a response detail. Every word 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?

Given 3 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the core purpose and a key parameter requirement, but it lacks details on pagination behavior, sorting, or response structure. It is adequate but not complete.

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 low (33%), only covering `since`. The tool description adds value for `since` by reiterating that it's required, but it does not provide any information about `page` or `perPage`, leaving them undocumented. This is insufficient compensation.

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 lists parties deleted on or after a given timestamp, with the verb 'list' and resource 'deleted parties'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'list_parties' by focusing on deletions.

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 that the `since` parameter is required, which is a clear usage guideline. However, it does not mention when to use this tool over alternatives like 'list_deleted_opportunities' or 'filter_parties', nor does it provide exclusions.

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