delete_dictionary_word

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It does reveal a specific error condition (dictionary_is_linked for glossaryLink dictionaries), which is useful. But it does not describe other important behaviors such as irreversibility, permissions needed, or success response format, leaving gaps.

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 two sentences with no unnecessary words. The main action is front-loaded, and the rejection condition is stated concisely. Every word adds value.

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 tool is simple and the description gives a key warning. However, there is no mention of how to obtain the entryId, what happens on success, or whether deletion is permanent. Given the absence of annotations and output schema, a bit more context would improve completeness.

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 schema documents 'source' with a description, but 'entryId' is just a string with no description. The tool description adds no explanation of entryId, so the parameter remains ambiguous. With 50% schema description coverage, the description should have compensated but did not.

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 action ('Deletes') and the resource ('glossary entry'), which aligns with the tool name and distinguishes it from other delete tools like delete_entity and delete_attribute. It also provides a specific failure condition, making the purpose 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?

The description gives an explicit when-not condition: standard-linked (glossaryLink) dictionaries are rejected. This tells the user when the tool will not work. However, it does not mention alternative tools or broader use cases, so it falls short of a full 5.

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