Delete store

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

Annotations already mark the operation as destructive and idempotent, but the description adds important context beyond that: it is a soft delete, the underlying data is preserved, and only the store record is marked as deleted. This clarifies what actually happens and reduces the risk of the agent assuming permanent data destruction.

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 two short sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, and the behavioral clarification about data preservation is presented immediately after, making it easy to parse.

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 tool with one documented parameter and no output schema, the description is sufficiently complete. It states the action, ownership constraint, and soft-delete behavior, covering everything an agent needs to invoke the tool correctly.

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 schema already fully documents store_id as "The ID of the store to delete," so the description does not need to repeat it. The description adds no new parameter-level detail beyond the schema, which is acceptable given 100% schema coverage.

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 states a specific verb and resource: "Soft-delete a store owned by your account." It clearly distinguishes the operation from a hard delete and clarifies the ownership scope, so an agent can immediately understand what the tool does.

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 provides clear context for when this tool is appropriate: deleting a store while preserving its underlying data. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the soft-delete semantics and account ownership constraint give enough guidance for a single-parameter delete tool.

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