tickerbot_delete_custom_signal

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It details cascade-safe deletion, the 409 conflict response listing referencing signals, the force option, and the consequence that existing references will break on next recompile — strong transparency for a destructive operation.

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 three efficiently structured sentences: what it does, default safety behavior, and force behavior. Every sentence delivers necessary information with 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?

For a simple two-parameter delete tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential behavior: target scope, conflict handling, force alternative, and plan availability. Minor lack of explicit success response details is acceptable and likely inferred from standard API conventions.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the real-world consequence of force: existing references will break on next recompile, which goes beyond the schema's simple 'skip the reference check' phrasing.

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 'Delete one of the caller's custom signals,' a specific verb-resource pair that clearly identifies the tool's scope and distinguishes it from sibling delete tools like tickerbot_delete_universe and tickerbot_delete_webhook.

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 makes clear the tool operates on the caller's own custom signals and notes it is available on every plan, providing actionable context. It does not explicitly name alternatives or edge cases where another tool should be used, but the scope is unambiguous.

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