Delete product

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description only adds 'Destructive.' which merely repeats the destructiveHint annotation, adding no new behavioral context. It does not mention return values, side effects, or any special behaviors not already covered by annotations.

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 extremely short and front-loaded with the action. However, 'Destructive.' is redundant with the destructiveHint annotation, so it does not earn its place. The message is concise but includes a superfluous word.

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 mutation tool with no output schema, the description is under-specified. It does not mention what the tool returns, whether deletion is permanent or reversible, or any downstream effects on related data. Annotations mitigate the 'destructive' awareness, but the description alone leaves an agent without enough information to fully anticipate the operation's outcome.

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 50%: locationId has a description, but productId does not. The tool description adds no parameter information, so an agent gains no extra understanding of productId's purpose or format beyond the schema's minimal type field. The description does not compensate for the incomplete schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Delete a product.' This clearly differentiates it from siblings like ghl_get_product, ghl_create_product, and ghl_update_product. 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, consequences (e.g., cascading deletions), or a scenario where another operation (like updating status) might be preferred. The description offers no decision support.

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