delete_rows

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full behavioral disclosure burden. It mentions mandatory filters, optimistic predicates, and commit guards, but fails to disclose that this is a destructive operation, whether changes are immediately committed, failure behavior, or rollback support.

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 efficient sentence that front-loads the action and key concepts, 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 complexity (7 parameters, 3 required, no output schema), the description is too brief. It lacks explanation of success/failure behavior, return values, or safety warnings for this destructive tool.

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%, providing baseline 3. The description adds meaning by mapping 'mandatory filters' to the 'where' parameter, 'optimistic predicates' to 'concurrency', and 'commit guards' to 'expected_rows' and 'max_affected_rows', which enriches the technical schema descriptions.

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 specifies the verb 'Delete' and resource 'rows', and highlights key features (mandatory filters, optimistic predicates, commit guards). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'select_rows' or 'insert_rows', though it could be more explicit about the meaning of 'commit guards'.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention when not to use it or any prerequisites. It lacks explicit differentiation from sibling tools.

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