Удалить бюджет

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

Annotations already mark the tool destructive, but the description adds important behavioral specifics: the deletion cascades to the budget's discussion and explicitly does not cascade to operations. This gives the agent concrete knowledge of what will be affected beyond the raw destructive flag.

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 contain the action, the key side effect, and the key exclusion, with no redundant wording. All sentences contribute information an agent needs before calling the tool.

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 simple two-parameter delete operation with annotations marking destructiveness, the description plus schema is largely sufficient. The only minor gap is the absence of any statement about return behavior or error conditions, but no output schema exists and the core call semantics are clear.

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 100%, so both parameters are already documented; the description adds no parameter-specific detail. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema carries the full semantic load.

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 uses a specific verb ('Удаляет' = deletes) with a clear resource ('бюджет') and explicitly delimits scope by stating the discussion is also deleted while operations are left untouched. This allows the agent to distinguish it from budgets_save and operations_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 makes the main use case obvious—delete a budget—and the 'operations are not touched' clause hints that this is not the right tool for deleting operations, but it does not explicitly state when to use it instead of alternatives. Usage guidance remains implied rather than explicit.

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