delete_cell

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It reveals that deletion returns a new rev and mentions concurrency guard, but it omits important behavioral traits such as irreversibility, permission requirements, or error behavior if both index and cell_id are provided or if the cell doesn't exist.

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 concise (three sentences) and well-structured, front-loading the action and key options without extraneous words.

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 no output schema or annotations, the description is somewhat incomplete. It lacks details on the irreversible nature of deletion, potential failure modes, and the meaning of the returned rev. The missing path parameter explanation further reduces completeness.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It effectively describes index, cell_id, and expected_rev, but neglects the required 'path' parameter entirely, which is a significant gap.

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 tool deletes a cell and provides addressing options (index or cell_id). The verb and resource are specific, but it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like edit_cell or move_cell, though the purpose is unambiguous.

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 advises preferring cell_id over index due to drift risk, and suggests using expected_rev for concurrency protection. However, it does not specify when not to use this tool or contrast it with alternatives like patch_cell or delete operations for other resources.

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