delete_event_question

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only says 'delete' without disclosing consequences (permanence, cascading effects, permission requirements, or success/failure behavior). The lack of detail on side effects is a significant gap for a mutation tool.

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 a single concise sentence with no fluff. It is appropriately short for a simple delete tool, though it omits critical behavioral context. The structure is clean, but the brevity comes at the cost of completeness.

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 low complexity with only two parameters, but the description lacks any mention of return values, side effects, permissions, or error conditions. Given the presence of an output schema (per context signals), the description should clarify what the operation returns or confirms, which it does not. Incomplete for safe invocation.

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 0%, and the description does not mention event_id or question_id. While the parameter names are self-explanatory, the description adds no meaning beyond what the schema already shows, failing to compensate for the missing schema documentation.

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 states a clear verb (delete) and resource (custom registration question), distinguishing it from sibling delete tools by resource type. It is not a tautology and is unambiguous, though it could be more explicit about scope (e.g., permanent removal).

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 like delete_event or delete_discount. There are no preconditions, context, or references to sibling tools, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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