delete_ml_model

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'delete' which implies destructive action but doesn't disclose side effects (e.g., cascading deletes, soft vs hard delete behavior, reversibility, or auth requirements). Parameters like 'hard_delete' and 'recursive' hint at behavior but are not explained.

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 short sentence, which is concise but lacks structure and depth. It is not verbose but also does not earn its place by providing helpful context beyond the bare minimum. It could be expanded with key details without sacrificing conciseness.

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 annotations, no output schema, and only one required parameter explained implicitly, the description is severely incomplete. It does not cover parameter details, return values, error conditions, or any behavioral context. The agent has insufficient information to use the tool reliably.

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 input schema has three parameters with 0% description coverage. The description does not explain any parameter meaning beyond the schema's titles. For a tool with such low coverage, the description must compensate but fails to do so, leaving the agent to guess parameter semantics.

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 verb (delete) and resource (ML model) and platform (OpenMetadata). It effectively distinguishes the tool's purpose from other tools by entity type, though it doesn't differentiate beyond the entity name. It's specific and 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?

No usage guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus other delete tools (e.g., delete_table, delete_bot) or any prerequisites like required permissions or model state. The agent receives no guidance on context.

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