delete_entities

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose a key side effect: associated relations are also deleted. However, it does not mention what happens to observations attached to the entities, whether deletion is permanent, or any other side effects. This is a partial disclosure.

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 a single sentence that is front-loaded with the action and scope. Every word contributes meaning, with no redundant or filler content.

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?

Given the tool's simple one-parameter interface, the description covers the core operation, but it leaves ambiguity about the fate of observations and whether deletion is reversible. With no output schema and no annotations, these omissions prevent a higher score.

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 fully describes entityNames as 'An array of entity names to delete' (100% schema coverage). The description adds no additional meaning for the parameter, so the baseline 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 uses a specific verb ('Delete') and identifies the resource ('multiple entities and their associated relations') within the Memento MCP knowledge graph. It clearly distinguishes this tool from siblings like delete_relations by noting the cascading deletion of associated relations.

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 implies this tool should be used when both entities and their relations need to be deleted, versus using delete_relations separately. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives, list exclusions, or mention prerequisites. The usage guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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