delete_food_order

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states that the order is moved to trash, not permanently deleted, and notes it can be restored. This is a key behavioral trait that goes beyond a simple 'delete' label. However, it does not cover potential side effects (e.g., cascading effects on related data) or authentication requirements.

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 two sentences, front-loading the main action and then adding a clarifying detail. Every sentence provides value, with no redundancy or fluff.

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 tool is simple (one integer parameter, soft delete). The description adequately covers the core behavior and the non-permanent nature. It does not mention the return value, but given the lack of an output schema, this is a minor gap. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for an experienced agent.

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 the parameter 'id' is fully described in the schema as 'WooCommerce order ID to trash.' The description does not add any new semantic information beyond what the schema already provides. The baseline of 3 is appropriate since the schema is sufficient.

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: 'Move a food order to trash.' It specifies the verb (Move) and the resource (food order), and distinguishes this from a permanent delete by explaining it can be restored. This directly differentiates it from a hypothetical permanent delete tool, making the purpose unambiguous.

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. While it explains the tool's behavior (soft delete), it does not mention when not to use it or compare it to other delete tools (e.g., delete_location, delete_discount). The agent must infer usage context without explicit direction.

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