custom_properties_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 does disclose the destructive nature via the verb 'Delete', the operational scope ('single... by ID'), and the authorization prerequisite ('Requires Write on CustomProperty'), which is genuinely useful context. It remains silent on failure behavior for non-existent IDs, whether deletion cascades to property values attached to devices or groups, and what a successful response looks like.

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?

Two tight sentences with zero filler: the core action is front-loaded first, and the authorization prerequisite follows as a separate sentence. Every clause earns its place, and the key scoping fact ('single... by ID') leads the first sentence.

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 with no nested objects and no output schema, the description covers the essential context: action, scope, and required permission. The only gaps are return/error semantics — what the caller receives on success or when the ID is not found — which are minor given the tool's low complexity but would round out the picture.

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%, so the schema already documents id as an 'Integer ID' and the baseline is 3. The description's 'by ID' reinforces that the parameter selects the target custom property to delete, adding slight semantic context beyond the bare schema. No additional type, format, or lookup guidance is provided.

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 uses a specific verb-resource pair ('Delete... Custom Property') and scopes the action precisely to a single record identified by ID. The 'single' qualifier cleanly differentiates it from sibling custom_properties_delete_many, and the delete verb separates it from the add/update/search/get siblings. There is no ambiguity about what this tool does.

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 'single... by ID' phrasing implies when to use this tool — delete exactly one custom property when its ID is known — and the 'Requires Write on CustomProperty' note states a precondition. However, no alternative is named explicitly; an agent must infer that bulk deletion maps to custom_properties_delete_many or that a lookup tool precedes deletion. This is implied rather than explicit routing guidance.

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