make_delete_dlq

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full disclosure burden. It reveals a safety-driven design choice ('intentionally NOT supported'), clarifies that only the specified ids are removed, and references the source list. It stops short of mentioning permanence or error behavior, but the core behavioral traits are transparent.

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 three sentences with no fluff: state the purpose, give the usage instruction, and note the safety limitation. It is front-loaded with the action verb and every sentence earns its place.

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?

For a simple 2-parameter delete tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential context: what it does, how to use it, and a key boundary (not deleting all). It does not elaborate on edge cases like invalid ids or missing scenarios, but these are not critical for this low-complexity tool.

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 already covers 100% of parameters, giving a baseline of 3. The description adds meaningful nuance by specifying dlq_ids must be 'exact ids to delete (from make_list_incomplete)' and reinforcing that only those are removed, which directly clarifies parameter semantics beyond the schema.

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 opens with a specific verb+resource: 'Delete specific incomplete/failed execution(s) (DLQ items) by id, from a given scenario.' It clearly differentiates from siblings by emphasizing 'specific' and 'ONLY those are removed,' distinguishing it from broader operations like retry or list.

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 gives concrete usage direction: pass 'dlq_ids' as an array of exact ids from make_list_incomplete, and explicitly states a when-not: 'Deleting ALL incomplete executions of a scenario is intentionally NOT supported here, for safety.' It does not name an alternative tool, but the guidance is strong and context-rich.

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