Coda Delete Row

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is partly structured. The description adds real context beyond that: the removal is permanent and irreversible, plus a recommended verification step. It stops short of stating permission/ACL requirements or any error behavior, so it is not a 5.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action, then irreversibility, then verification and the alternative. No filler; every sentence carries a distinct piece of information.

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 destructive single-row tool with full schema coverage, an output schema (so return values need no prose), and annotations covering safety, the description supplies everything else an agent needs: irreversibility, a verification precondition, and the bulk alternative.

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% and all three parameters (doc_id, table_id_or_name, row_id_or_name) are documented in the schema. The description adds no format hints (e.g., whether a row name is accepted vs. an ID) beyond what the schema already says, so the 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?

States a specific verb (Delete) and resource (a single row from a Coda table), with the scope word 'single' explicitly distinguishing it from the bulk sibling. An agent can tell it apart from coda_delete_rows without opening either schema.

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?

Names a concrete precondition ('Verify the row with coda_get_row before deleting') and an explicit alternative with the selecting condition ('For bulk deletion, use coda_delete_rows with a list of row IDs instead'). When-to-use and when-to-use-something-else are both covered.

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