telys_delete

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

Beyond the annotations (destructive, idempotent), the description explains the tombstone mechanism, persistence of the store, deferred physical reclamation by telys_compact, and failure mode for nonexistent collections. This adds significant behavioral context not present in structured fields.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core action and effect, followed by usage context and edge cases. Every sentence adds valuable information; there is no fluff or 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?

For a two-parameter tool with full schema coverage, destructive/idempotent annotations, and no output schema, the description covers behavior, persistence, failure, and usage intent. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly.

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%, and the schema already documents 'ids' as 'external ids to tombstone' and 'collection' as 'name of an existing collection.' The description repeats the requirement ('Required: collection, ids') but adds no new meaning beyond the schema.

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, 'tombstone,' and identifies exactly what is affected (rows by external id) and the observable consequence (no longer appear in queries or id listings). It also implicitly distinguishes this from telys_compact, which reclaims physical space, making the tool's role clear relative to siblings.

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 gives a direct use case ('Use to forget memories') and important behavioral conditions (repeat is a no-op, fails if collection missing). It does not explicitly contrast with alternative deletion or modification tools, but there is no other obvious delete sibling and the stated context is sufficient for correct selection.

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