ghl_estimate_delete

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint true and idempotentHint true. The description adds the endpoint URL and required OAuth scopes (invoices/estimate.write), providing useful behavioral context beyond annotations. It does not, however, describe error conditions or side effects.

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 extremely concise with no wasted words, front-loading the purpose in the first sentence and providing endpoint/scopes in subsequent lines.

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?

While the schema covers parameters and annotations cover safety, the description could be more complete by explaining the requirement for body.altId and body.altType, or clarifying what happens after deletion. Given the simplicity of the tool, the current description is adequate but not thorough.

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% with descriptions for both parameters (estimateId and body with nested altId/altType). The description adds no additional parameter context, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 title 'Delete Estimate' and description 'Delete an existing estimate' clearly state the tool's purpose. The name ghl_estimate_delete uses a specific verb+resource, and it is distinct from sibling tools like ghl_estimate_create and ghl_estimate_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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as prerequisites (e.g., estimate must exist) or when not to use it (e.g., if already deleted). A simple usage hint would improve clarity.

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