Delete business

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

The word 'Destructive' restates the destructiveHint annotation and adds no new behavioral context, such as whether deletion cascades to related records, is reversible, or requires special permissions. The annotations already carry the safety profile, but the description contributes nothing beyond them.

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 two short sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the destructive warning is immediate. 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 annotations covering destructiveness, the description is minimally viable. However, it does not mention what happens after deletion, whether the operation is reversible, or what response to expect, and there is no output schema to fill that gap.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description needed to compensate by explaining the businessId parameter, but it does not mention it at all. The parameter name suggests a business identifier, and the description confirms the target is a business record, but no format, source, or additional meaning is provided.

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 specific action ('Delete') and resource ('a business record'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like ghl_delete_relation and ghl_update_business. It is direct and leaves no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ghl_update_business or ghl_delete_relation. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or conditions under which a different tool should be chosen.

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