perspective_delete

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

Despite no annotations, the description fully discloses side effects (writes to OmniFocus, removes perspective, sets meta.syncPending=true), permanence (no undo), return value ({ id }), and error conditions (validation error for built-ins, OF_FEATURE_REQUIRES_PRO without Pro).

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 appropriately sized, front-loaded with the primary action, followed by usage conditions, side effects, and an example. Every sentence contributes valuable information without 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?

Covers all necessary aspects: what is deleted, prerequisites, error scenarios, side effects, return format, and even a recommended follow-up action (sync_trigger). No gaps given the tool's complexity and lack of output schema.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, the description adds significant meaning: how to obtain a valid perspectiveId (from perspective_list, looking for kind 'custom'), notes that built-in ids are rejected, and provides an example call.

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 it deletes a custom OmniFocus perspective by id, distinguishing it from other tools like perspective_create or perspective_update. The verb 'delete' and resource 'custom perspective' are specific, and it explicitly notes it does not apply to built-in perspectives.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use ('cleaning up after a templated workflow, or rotating out a stale view') and when-not-to-use (built-in perspectives, which cannot be deleted). Also mentions preconditions (requires OmniFocus Pro) and recommends confirming with the user and using sync_trigger after deletion.

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