recurring_invoices_delete

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

Although annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, the description adds important behavioral detail: deletion is permanent and previously generated invoices are unaffected. It does not explain permission requirements or confirmation behavior, but it adds meaningful context beyond the annotations.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the permanent-delete outcome and immediately followed by the key side-effect and safer alternative. Every sentence contributes useful information without 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?

For a destructive delete tool with annotations, full schema coverage, and no output schema, the description gives the critical context: deletion is permanent and generated invoices are unaffected. It could mention bulk-delete alternatives or authorization expectations, but nothing essential is missing for a correct call.

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%, so both the uuid and companyId parameters are already documented in the schema. The description does not add any parameter-specific syntax, defaults, or constraints beyond what the schema provides, making 3 the correct baseline.

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 names a specific verb and resource: "Permanently delete a recurring invoice template." It also distinguishes the action from the closely related pause behavior by explicitly pointing to toggle.

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?

It explicitly says to use toggle instead when the goal is to temporarily pause, which is a clear alternative-use rule. It does not mention bulk-delete siblings or other deletion contexts, so it falls just short of full guidance.

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