Delete ACF Field Group

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility. It mentions backup creation 'when possible' but does not specify the failure conditions, reversibility, or the impact on associated data. For a delete operation, more detailed behavioral disclosure is needed (e.g., irreversibility, error states).

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 sentence, which is concise. However, it could be slightly expanded to include parameter details without losing conciseness. Currently, it is efficient but lacks completeness.

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 deletion tool with no output schema and 3 parameters, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return value, potential errors (e.g., key not found), or the success/failure behavior. Agents cannot predict the tool's output or handle edge cases.

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?

The input schema has 3 parameters with zero description coverage. The description partially explains the 'key' parameter ('by key') and hints at 'backup' ('creating a backup'), but fails to explain 'dryRun' or specify how the backup parameter works. Agents cannot infer the purpose of 'dryRun' or the exact behavior of 'backup' from the description alone.

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 'delete', the resource 'field group Local JSON file', and includes the condition 'after creating a backup when possible'. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like 'acf_get_field_group' and 'acf_list_field_groups'.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or scenarios where deletion is inappropriate. It lacks context that would help an agent decide between this and other tools like 'acf_update_field_group' or 'acf_validate_field_group'.

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