Coda Delete Rows

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the safety profile is largely covered. The description adds genuinely useful context beyond that: irreversibility ('Permanently removes... This is irreversible') and the async return contract ('Returns a requestId for async mutation tracking'). It does not, however, discuss permissions or partial-failure behavior.

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?

Front-loads the action, then the critical warning, then the prerequisite, then the return shape, then the sibling preference. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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 batch mutation, the description covers irreversibility, prerequisite step, async tracking, and sibling choice. An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is not needed, and nothing essential is missing.

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 the schema already documents doc_id, table_id_or_name, and row_ids. The description only adds that row_ids come from coda_list_rows, which is marginal. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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+resource ('Delete multiple rows from a Coda table') with explicit scope ('in a single call'). It clearly distinguishes itself from the singular sibling coda_delete_row by contrasting the batch behavior.

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?

Explicitly names the prerequisite action ('List the rows first with coda_list_rows to get their IDs') and the alternative it beats ('Prefer this over calling coda_delete_row in a loop'), with the reason (performance/rate limit efficiency). Nothing is left to inference.

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