persons.delete

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. While 'Delete' implies destruction, it fails to disclose whether this is a soft or hard delete, if associated data (e.g., payment methods) are cascaded, or if the operation is reversible.

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 brief at four words, it avoids wordiness but is underspecified for a destructive operation with undocumented parameters. The single sentence does earn its place by stating core purpose.

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 destructive tool with zero schema descriptions and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It lacks behavioral specifics, parameter explanations, and side effect disclosure necessary for safe agent invocation.

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 description coverage is 0% for both accountId and personId. The description mentions neither parameter nor their relationship to the person being deleted, failing to compensate for the undocumented schema.

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?

States a specific verb (Delete) and resource (Ryft person), distinguishing it from sibling tools like customers.delete or paymentMethods.delete. However, it does not elaborate on what constitutes a 'Ryft person' within the domain.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., persons.update to disable vs delete), nor prerequisites like person existence or account ownership verification.

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