retell_delete_knowledge_base_source

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the transparency burden. It merely states 'Remove' without disclosing whether the action is permanent, whether there are side effects, or any error conditions. The agent cannot infer whether this is a safe read-like operation or a destructive one with consequences.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that is concise and front-loaded. It includes the verb, object, and scope without any 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?

The tool is simple (2 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), so the description is adequate for basic invocation. However, it lacks important safety context (e.g., irreversibility, behavior on missing source) and doesn't explain what the response will look like, leaving some gaps for a deletion operation.

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% - both parameters have descriptions. The tool description does not add extra meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 action ('Remove'), the specific resource ('a specific source from an existing knowledge base'), and the method ('by its source ID'). This distinguishes it from siblings like retell_delete_knowledge_base (removes entire KB) and retell_add_knowledge_base_sources (adds sources).

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 provides clear context: removing a specific source from an existing knowledge base by source ID. It implies this is for single-source removal, but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions. The sibling list helps infer when to use it, but no direct 'use instead of X' guidance is given.

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