delete_agent

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It labels the operation as a mutation and mandates confirmation, which is helpful. However, it omits details about irreversibility, cascading effects, or required permissions, leaving behavioral gaps.

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 with a clarifying note, front-loading the core purpose. Every part is informative and necessary, with no wasted words.

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?

Given no annotations, the description covers the mutation nature and confirmation need, but lacks completeness on side effects, reversibility, and permissions. For a destructive tool with many siblings, it is adequate but not exhaustive.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the 'confirm' parameter ('pasar confirm=true para ejecutar'), clarifying its role in confirming a dangerous action. This goes beyond the schema's description.

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 tool deletes an agent ('Elimina un agente'), specifies it's a mutation, and mentions confirmation requirement. This distinguishes it from other delete tools targeting different entities (e.g., delete_calendar, delete_ai_error).

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 notes that confirmation is required to execute, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., other delete tools) or provide prerequisites like needing the agent ID. Usage context is implied but not fully articulated.

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