delete_uib_page

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

The description includes '[Write]' to indicate mutation, and the annotations already signal destructiveHint=true. However, it does not disclose additional behavioral details such as whether deletion is irreversible, cascading effects, or permission requirements. The annotations carry most of the burden, so a score of 3 is appropriate.

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 extremely concise: a single sentence and a tag. Every word serves a purpose, and there is no redundancy.

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 simplicity of the tool (1 required param, no output schema, destructive nature), the description is mostly sufficient. The annotations provide the destructive context. However, it could improve by briefly noting irreversible effects or required permissions, but overall it is complete enough for a straightforward delete 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?

The input schema covers 100% of the single parameter (sys_id) with a description. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is correct.

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') and the resource ('UI Builder page'), making it unmistakable. It also distinguishes from sibling tools like create_uib_page, update_uib_page, and get_uib_page.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., updating or retiring a page). There is no mention of preconditions, side effects, or exclusion criteria.

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