ghl_opportunity_delete

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

Description adds OAuth scope (opportunities.write) and endpoint path, which are not in annotations. Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description complements rather than contradicts.

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?

Extremely concise: three lines with no fluff. Front-loaded with the core action 'Delete Opportunity', followed by essential technical details.

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 delete-by-id tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential action, endpoint, and OAuth scopes. Lacks explicit mention of consequences (e.g., cascading effects), but annotations handle risk transparency.

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 a single 'id' parameter well-described. Description adds no additional parameter context, so baseline score of 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?

Description explicitly states 'Delete Opportunity', which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling opportunity tools (e.g., create, get, update) and other delete tools due to the unique resource type.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., updating opportunity status instead of deleting). No context on prerequisites or side effects beyond the action itself.

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