Delete category

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuine value beyond that by disclosing the blast radius (products are retained, only the category association is removed) and mandating user confirmation, though it omits irreversibility and failure behavior for a bad or missing category_id.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the destructive action and immediately followed by the side effect and the confirmation requirement. No filler.

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 single-parameter mutation with annotations covering safety and no output schema, the description supplies the essential effect and the user-confirmation rule. Only the parameter's expected value and error conditions are missing, which is a modest 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 description coverage is 0% and there is one required parameter, so the description carries the burden of explaining category_id. It says nothing about the identifier's format, source (e.g. from list_catalog or save_category), or behavior on an unknown id, leaving the sole parameter undocumented in both places.

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?

States a specific verb (DELETES) and resource (product category), and the parenthetical clarifies the non-cascading effect, which meaningfully separates it from siblings like delete_product and delete_collection. It does not name an alternative tool directly, so it stops short of a 5.

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?

"Confirm with the user first" is a process prerequisite, not selection guidance. It never says when to delete a category versus e.g. reassigning products or using save_category to edit, so usage is only implied by the verb.

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