vibekit_delete_schedule

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Delete', which implies destructiveness, but does not disclose whether deletion is permanent, requires specific permissions, or what happens if the schedule does not exist. This is a significant transparency gap for a mutation tool.

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 a single sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource. It contains no fluff or redundant information, and every word contributes meaning. This is an appropriate length for such a simple 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?

The tool is simple (1 parameter, no output schema, no annotations). The description adequately states the purpose, but lacks information about return values, side effects, or error behavior. Since no output schema exists, the description could have mentioned what the caller should expect on success or failure. However, it is enough for a basic delete operation.

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 has one parameter with a clear description ('Schedule ID to delete'), achieving 100% coverage. The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so it matches the baseline of 3.

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 ('Delete') and identifies the exact resource ('account-level recurring schedule'). The 'account-level' qualifier distinguishes it from sibling tools like vibekit_delete_app_schedule, making the purpose clear and unambiguous.

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 clear context by specifying 'account-level', which implies it is not for app-level schedules. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool. This is slightly better than mere implication because the account-level scope is directly stated, but lacks explicit exclusion guidance.

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