delete_block

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses a critical behavioral limitation (only server-created workouts are deleted) and what cannot be deleted. However, it does not state whether deletion is irreversible, mention permissions, or describe side effects beyond the immediate scope.

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 short paragraphs with the primary action front-loaded. Every sentence adds meaningful information about scope or limitations, with no unnecessary words or repetition.

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 three straightforward required parameters and an existing output schema, the description sufficiently explains the tool's operation and its key limitation. It lacks explicit mention of permissions or irreversibility, but for a delete operation with a clearly scoped action, it is adequately 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?

The input schema already provides descriptive parameter definitions ('The block to remove', 'Search from/to this date'), covering 100% of parameters. The description adds minimal extra parameter context and primarily repeats the block-name and date-range concepts already present in the schema.

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 'Removes a block from the calendar' with a specific verb and resource, and clarifies the precise scope by noting it deletes only server-created workouts under the given block name. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like upload_block, list_block, and export_block.

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?

Provides clear usage context: the tool only affects server-created workouts under the named block, and explicitly warns that self-added, imported, or other-block workouts cannot be hit. It does not name alternative tools, but the conditions for successful use are clearly implied.

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