delete_customer

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden and effectively discloses key behavioral traits: it specifies 'soft-delete' and clarifies that the record is 'archived but not permanently removed'. This informs the agent about the non-destructive nature, though it lacks details on permissions, reversibility, or side effects.

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 front-loaded with the core action in the first sentence and adds clarifying detail in the second. Both sentences earn their place by defining the operation and its archival effect, with zero wasted words.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (a mutation with no annotations) and the presence of an output schema (which handles return values), the description is reasonably complete. It covers the soft-delete behavior adequately, though it could benefit from mentioning permissions or error conditions.

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 0% with 1 parameter, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning by explaining that 'customer_id' is used to identify the customer for soft-deletion, though it does not specify format or constraints. This provides essential context beyond the bare schema.

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 specific action ('soft-delete') and target resource ('a customer by ID'), distinguishing it from siblings like 'update_customer' or 'get_customer'. It precisely defines the operation as archival rather than permanent removal.

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 implies usage for archiving customers but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'update_customer' for deactivation or other deletion methods. No guidance on prerequisites or exclusions is provided.

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