ghl_social_delete_csv

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

Annotations provided destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds context by specifying that all associated posts are also deleted, clarifying the scope of destruction. No contradiction with annotations.

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 short: three lines. The first line 'Delete CSV' is redundant with the tool name and title. The core purpose is captured in the second line. The endpoint line adds technical detail but is acceptable. Could be slightly more concise by omitting the first line.

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?

The tool is simple with two parameters and clear annotations. The description explains the key effect. However, it does not specify the response on success (e.g., nothing returned) or error handling. Still, it is adequate given the low complexity.

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 already describes both parameters with 100% coverage (CSV Id, Location Id). The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema provides. 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?

The description clearly states the tool deletes a CSV import and all its associated posts. The verb 'Delete' and resource 'CSV import' are specific. It distinguishes from sibling tools like ghl_social_delete_csv_post (which deletes a single post) and ghl_social_csv_list (listing imports).

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like ghl_social_delete_csv_post. It implies usage by describing the scope (entire import vs single post), but lacks explicit guidance on prerequisites or when not to use.

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