delete_report

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

Although annotations already indicate destructive and idempotent behavior, the description adds crucial context: 'There is no per-object undo in the report API.' This explains irreversibility beyond just a destructive hint and also discloses the response format, which is not fully captured by the annotations. No contradictions with annotations are present.

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 extremely concise: two sentences that state the core action, the key behavioral caveat, and the return values. It is front-loaded and every word adds value, with no redundant information.

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 operation with one parameter, the description covers all essential aspects: what is deleted, the irreversibility, the copy alternative, and the response payload. The output schema exists and handles return details, so no additional completeness gaps are evident.

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 has 100% coverage for the single required parameter report_id, with a clear description. The tool description adds no additional meaning or format details beyond what the schema already provides, so the 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 starts with 'Delete a Visual Analytics report and its content', using a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like copy_report or create_report. It also clarifies the scope (report plus its content), leaving no ambiguity about what action is performed.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool: 'deleting and rebuilding (or copying first) is how you discard an unwanted report.' It also implies the alternative of copying first as a safeguard, and warns about the lack of undo, providing clear guidance for a destructive operation.

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