delete_cycle

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the destructive nature is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral detail: exactly one of id or date is required, date resolution matches only the period start date or any date within it, and an ambiguous match causes an error that returns candidate IDs to retry with. This goes beyond the structured annotations.

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 purpose, followed by usage constraints and selector details. Every sentence earns its place, with no filler or repetition of schema content.

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 2-parameter destructive tool with annotations and an output schema, the description is complete. It covers what the tool does, when to use it, when not to use it, how to select the target, and how ambiguity is handled. Nothing essential is missing.

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 schema already documents both parameters. However, the description adds important semantics: 'Exactly one required' clarifies the optional-looking schema, and it explains how date resolves and what happens on ambiguous matches. This meaningfully aids correct invocation beyond the schema alone.

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 states a specific verb and resource: delete a period record. It explicitly distinguishes itself from update_cycle, telling the agent it must not use this tool to 'fix' a record. This makes it easy to tell apart from the sibling update_cycle tool.

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 guidance: only when the user explicitly asks to remove a specific record. It also gives a clear exclusion and alternative: do not delete to fix a record; use update_cycle instead. The selector instructions further clarify how to invoke it correctly.

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