delete_glossary

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

The description implies a destructive operation (delete) but provides no details on side effects (e.g., deleting terms with a glossary), permissions, or idempotency. No annotations supplement this.

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 no waste, but it is undersized for a tool with 3 parameters and no annotations. It conveys only the bare purpose.

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 output schema, no annotations, and 0% schema coverage, the description is insufficient. It does not explain return values, behavior for non-existent glossaries, or how hard_delete/recursive affect the operation.

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 0% and the description does not mention any parameters (glossary_id, hard_delete, recursive). The agent receives no guidance on parameter semantics beyond the schema itself.

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 'Delete a glossary from OpenMetadata', which is clear in verb and resource but lacks differentiation from sibling delete tools like delete_bot or delete_chart. It does not explain what a glossary is or its context.

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 indication of when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., delete_glossary_term or soft vs hard delete). No prerequisites or exclusions mentioned.

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