delete-component

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that links to/from the component are removed, which is good. However, it does not mention if the workflow must be in draft state, if the action is reversible, or any permissions needed. Partially transparent but missing key details.

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?

Single sentence, no redundant words, front-loaded with the action and resource. Highly concise and well-structured.

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?

The description covers the basic behavioral effect (removing links) but lacks context about draft workflow requirement, error handling, or consequences for dependent components. For a destructive action, more completeness is expected given no annotations or output schema.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does not explain what workflowId and componentId refer to or how to obtain them. The parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, but no additional guidance 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 action (delete) and the resource (component from a draft workflow), including the additional detail about removing links. It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'terminate-component' which applies to running components.

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 explicit guidance on when to use or not use this tool. It mentions 'draft workflow' but does not clarify that it is only for drafts, nor does it contrast with alternatives like 'terminate-component'. There is no mention of prerequisites or error conditions.

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