suppliers_delete

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

Goes well beyond the annotations (destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true) by disclosing exact mutation semantics: soft-delete only, related incoming invoices preserved, and automatic un-deletion triggered by a future ANAF sync. That auto-restore behavior is non-obvious and directly affects an agent's decision to call it.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the operation and its reversibility, then the downstream consequences. No filler, and each sentence adds a distinct fact.

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 mutating delete tool with full schema coverage, the description covers the key behavioral surprises (data retention, auto-restore). Minor gaps remain: no note on required permissions, behavior when the supplier is already deleted, or response shape — though no output schema exists either.

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% with only two parameters (uuid required, companyId optional override), so the schema already carries the parameter meaning. The description adds nothing about the uuid target or the companyId override, which is acceptable given full coverage but is baseline-level.

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 — "soft-delete a supplier record" — and immediately clarifies what that means operationally (marked deleted, not permanently removed). It implicitly contrasts with a hard delete (e.g. suppliers_bulk_delete) but never names a sibling or route.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: the soft-delete semantics tell an agent this is the reversible option, but there is no explicit "use this instead of X when Y" and no mention of when a permanent removal or bulk operation would be preferred. Sibling suppliers_bulk_delete is not referenced.

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