delete_automatic_discount

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

No annotations present, so description bears full responsibility. Warns that deletion is permanent and cannot be undone, which is critical. Lacks other traits (e.g., required permissions, effects on active discounts, error handling).

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, no redundant information. Action and critical warning front-loaded. Every word earns its place.

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 one-parameter delete operation with no output schema, the description is nearly complete. Missing details about non-existent entities or side effects, but the core purpose and irreversibility 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% (id parameter documented as 'GID of the automatic discount node to delete'). Description adds no additional meaning beyond restating the purpose, so baseline 3 applies.

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?

Description clearly states the action (permanently delete) and the resource (automatic discount) with identifier (GID). Distinct from sibling tools like activate/deactivate or delete_code_discount.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The irreversibility warning is helpful but doesn't differentiate from other delete tools or specify prerequisites. Context from sibling names implies use case but not stated.

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