consumers_delete

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals important restrictions and permission requirements, which are key behavioral traits for a delete operation. It does not explicitly state that deletion is irreversible or describe side effects, but for a simple ID-based delete these are the most relevant details.

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 two focused sentences: the first names the action and target, the second adds constraints and permission. No unnecessary words or redundant schema information.

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 single-parameter delete tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers the core purpose, restrictions, and required permission. It could mention irreversibility or the expected response, but those are minor omissions given the simplicity of the 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 0%, so the description should compensate by explaining the 'id' parameter, but it only restates 'by ID' without adding format, source, or validation context. The integer id remains minimally documented.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource, 'Delete a Consumer by ID', which clearly states the action. It is easily distinguishable from the sibling consumers_delete_many by its focus on a single consumer.

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 concrete constraints: system consumers and consumers used by scheduled instructions cannot be deleted, and 'Write' permission on 'Consumer' is required. This effectively tells the agent when the tool will fail, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools like consumers_update or consumers_delete_many.

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