yandex_metrica_clean_logs_request

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

Annotations already declare destructive=true, idempotent=true, readOnly=false, so safety is covered structurally. The description adds genuine value beyond that: what is destroyed (prepared files), that quota is freed, and the precondition that status must be 'processed'. It does not cover auth requirements, but that is a minor omission given the annotation coverage.

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 tightly written sentences with zero waste; the destructive action and its precondition are front-loaded before the routing guidance.

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 two-parameter tool, the annotations carry the safety profile, the schema carries the parameters, and the description carries the when/when-not routing. There are no output-schema concerns since the action is a side-effecting deletion with no meaningful return payload.

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 coverage is 100%, so both counter_id and request_id are fully documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax or format detail beyond the state precondition implied by 'processed', so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 (delete), resource (prepared files of a processed Logs API export), and side effect (free the export quota). It is immediately distinguishable from siblings like cancel_logs_request and download_logs_part.

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?

Explicitly states when to use it ('finished downloading and the request status is processed'), when not to use it ('still pending'), and names the alternative tool by name. Nothing is left to inference.

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