Eliminar scope propio

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It states the deletion of an own scope and adds that force is only for owners, but does not clarify deletion behavior (e.g., soft vs. permanent), error handling, or side effects. A destructive action needs more disclosure.

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 concise sentence that gets straight to the point. It is front-loaded and contains 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?

This is a destructive delete operation with no output schema and no annotations. The description is too sparse; it does not explain the outcome, error conditions, or what constitutes an 'own' scope, leaving critical context unexplained.

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?

The schema already describes both parameters with 100% coverage. The description adds that force only works for owners, but this is already implied in the schema's description of force ('solo owner'), so the added value is minimal.

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 action: 'Elimina un scope propio' (Deletes an own scope). It is specific about deleting a scope owned by the caller, distinguishing it from generic delete_scope by the 'own' qualifier, though it relies on the name/title for that distinction.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like delete_scope. The only usage hint is the force parameter condition (only for owners), but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use instructions.

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