cst_delete_solid_tool

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing beyond the bare operation. It does not state that deletion is destructive and irreversible, whether dependent objects (components, materials, ports referencing the solid) are affected, or whether a failure occurs if the name is not found.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, which is structurally ideal for a simple tool. The brevity is efficient rather than padded, though it errs toward under-specification for a destructive operation.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, but for a destructive mutation with no annotations and an undocumented parameter the description is too thin. An agent cannot determine irreversibility, side effects, or parameter format from it.

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 single required parameter 'name' has 0% schema description coverage, and the description never mentions it. It is left unstated whether 'name' is the solid's exact model name, whether it is case-sensitive, or whether a pattern/prefix is accepted.

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 (Delete) and resource (a solid from the model), which is unambiguous and distinguishable from other deletion tools like cst_delete_parameter_tool. However, it offers no differentiation from any of the ~60 sibling tools beyond the noun 'solid', and does not clarify scope such as whether it targets the active project/model.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites (e.g., a project must be open, the solid must exist), and no warning about when not to use it. The agent is left to infer everything from the name alone.

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