everhour_delete_client

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states 'This action cannot be undone,' which is a key trait. However, it does not mention potential cascading effects on associated projects, tasks, or time records, nor authentication requirements. The irreversibility warning adds value but leaves room for more context.

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 consists of two short sentences: the core action and a necessary warning. There is no redundant phrasing, and every word earns its place. It is effectively front-loaded and concise.

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?

For a simple one-parameter delete operation with no output schema, the description covers the core action and irreversibility. The schema fully documents the parameter. It does not explain return values or potential side effects on related data, but given the simplicity of the operation, the description is reasonably 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 has 100% coverage with a single 'id' parameter described as 'Client ID'. The description does not add any additional meaning or context about the parameter beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Delete a client from Everhour') with a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools that operate on projects, tasks, time records, and other entities. The name and description are consistent.

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 (e.g., updating or archiving a client). The only added sentence is a warning about irreversibility, which is not a usage guideline but a caution. There are no prerequisites or exclusions mentioned.

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