Delete Contact

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, so the safety profile is partly covered. The description adds real value beyond that: it discloses the required scope (contacts:write) and the mandatory confirm=true gate, which an agent needs before invoking. It stops short of describing cascading effects or irreversibility 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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the two hard constraints (state change, confirm gate, scope). The first sentence duplicates the title, which is mild waste, but nothing else is padded.

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 destructive mutation with no output schema, the description covers the critical invocation requirements: state mutation, the confirmation gate, and the required scope. It omits what exactly gets deleted or whether the operation is recoverable, which would fully close the gap.

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 coverage is 67%; the schema already documents 'account' and 'confirm'. The description reinforces the confirm requirement and adds the contacts:write scope, but adds nothing about contact_uuid semantics or the account-vs-organization distinction beyond the schema's own text. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Delete Contact') and clarifies that it mutates Calendly state, making it distinguishable from create_contact, update_contact, and get_contact in the sibling list. It does not, however, explicitly name those siblings or scope what kind of contact record is affected.

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 notes that confirm=true is required for the action but gives no when-to-use guidance relative to the many sibling tools, no prerequisites for obtaining a contact_uuid, and no statement of when deletion is inappropriate (e.g. contacts tied to scheduled events).

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