Remove a CRM contact

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

The annotation already indicates destructiveHint=true, so the description's 'Remove' is consistent but adds no extra behavioral context (e.g., cascading effects, permanence). Without annotations, this would be a 1; with annotations, it provides minimal added value.

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?

Single sentence, no extraneous words, front-loaded with the verb and resource. Highly concise and well-structured.

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 destructive action with no output schema, the description covers the basic operation. However, it lacks details on consequences (e.g., what happens to associated data) and prerequisites, leaving some gaps for an agent.

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 67% (2 of 3 parameters described). The description reinforces the contact id format with an example, but adds little beyond the schema. Baseline 3 due to high coverage.

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 action (remove), the resource (contact), the context (from a company), and the identifier (contact id with example). It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like add_contact and update_contact.

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 guidance on when to use or avoid, no prerequisites or alternatives mentioned. The description only states what it does, not when it should be used.

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