mailer_config_delete

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

The annotations already identify this as destructive and idempotent. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations by explaining the post-delete effect: client documents revert to the default Storno address.

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 concise sentences. It front-loads the action and then immediately explains the operational consequence.

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 zero-parameter destructive configuration deletion, the description covers the essential action and its effect. It could add more explicit usage guidance, but annotations already provide safety and idempotency context, and no output schema exists.

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?

There are zero parameters, so parameter semantics are not a meaningful gap. The baseline for a no-parameter tool is 4, and no additional parameter explanation is needed.

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 specific verb and resource: delete the organization's custom email sender configuration. It is clearly distinct from sibling tools such as mailer_config_get, mailer_config_update, and mailer_config_test.

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 effect of deletion is described, which implies when an agent might use it: when custom email sending should be removed and default sending restored. However, it does not explicitly say when to choose this over mailer_config_update or what prerequisites or warnings apply.

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