derivation_delete_saved

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility. It explicitly warns that deletion is irreversible, specifies what gets destroyed (records and YAML files), and explains the confirm safety mechanism. This is thorough behavioral disclosure.

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 well-organized with a warning, args, returns, and example. Each sentence adds essential information without redundancy, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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 destructive delete operation with no annotations, the description covers the essential behavioral contract: irreversibility, affected resources, safety flag, and example invocation. The presence of an output schema (per context) means generic return description is acceptable.

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 provides only parameter names/types with no descriptions (0% coverage). The description adds meaning: result_id is the derivation result ID, and confirm must be True to delete, acting as a safety check. The example clarifies parameter usage.

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 saved derivation results, specifying both derivation records and YAML files. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like derivation_delete_step by targeting saved results rather than steps or sessions.

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 implies usage: use this to permanently delete saved results, and requires confirm=True to execute. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use, leaving comparison to sibling delete tools implicit.

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