Удалить роль

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

Even with destructiveHint=true, the description adds critical behavioral context: pre-made roles cannot be deleted, and roles with participants must be emptied first. This goes beyond the annotation to disclose failure conditions and required preconditions.

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 just two sentences: the first states the action, the second lists restrictions and a prerequisite. Every word earns its place, with no 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?

For a tool with only two well-documented parameters, no output schema, and existing annotations, this description is complete. It covers purpose, restrictions, and a necessary precondition, giving the agent everything needed to invoke the tool correctly.

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?

The input schema provides 100% coverage with clear descriptions for both parameters (case and role). The tool description does not add any parameter-specific semantics beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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's function: 'Удаляет роль дела' (Deletes a case role). It uses a specific verb and resource, and is distinct from sibling tools like roles_save and cases_delete.

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 provides explicit conditions for when the tool cannot be used (pre-made roles and roles with participants) and instructs a prerequisite action ('first move people to another role'). However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools, so it falls just short of a 5.

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