expiries_delete

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavior disclosure. It warns that deletion removes the expiry item/history and offers alternatives to preserve it, which is meaningful destructive-behavior context. It stops short of explicitly saying "permanent" or describing side effects, but the warning is sufficient for a simple delete.

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?

Two short sentences with no redundancy. The core action is front-loaded, and the alternative guidance is packed into a concise second sentence that names the exact tool and parameter.

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 delete operation with two well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description plus schema is nearly complete. It lacks an explicit statement of irreversibility or permission requirements, but the history-loss warning and alternative routing cover the main decision an agent needs.

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 100%; both uuid and companyId are already described in the schema, including the STORNO_COMPANY_ID override behavior. The description adds no parameter-level detail, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 a specific verb and resource: "Delete an expiry item." It also distinguishes itself from less destructive alternatives by explicitly naming expiries_update with closed=true, so an agent can tell when this tool is appropriate versus renewing or closing.

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?

Directly says when not to use it: "To keep the history, renew it or close it... instead." This gives an explicit condition and names the alternative tool, making the usage boundary clear.

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