ghl_estimate_template_delete

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the destructive nature is acknowledged. The description adds the HTTP method, endpoint path, and OAuth scopes, which go beyond annotations but do not elaborate on irreversibility, side effects, or special behavior.

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 brief: a title, one-line summary, endpoint, and scopes. It avoids fluff and is front-loaded. Could be slightly more structured, but it's efficient for a delete operation.

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?

No output schema, but the description doesn't mention what happens on success or failure, or whether the deletion is permanent. The role of the body parameters (altId, altType) is not explained in context. More completeness would help, e.g., confirming that the template is permanently removed.

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?

Both parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage). The description does not add further meaning beyond the schema; the body parameter's description is a meta-comment about the source. No extra clarity on how altId/altType are used.

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 Template' and description 'Delete an existing estimate template' clearly state the verb (delete) and resource (estimate template). The endpoint is provided, but it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like create or list; however, the purpose is 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 guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives, prerequisites, or conditions. The description lacks any contextual advice such as 'use this when you need to remove a template' or 'do not use if template is in use.'

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