rbd_snapshot_delete

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds value annotations cannot express: 'Irreversible' as a hard consequence plus a dry_run preview escape hatch, which is exactly the operational context an agent needs before executing.

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?

Front-loads the severity tag, action, and irreversibility first, then the dry_run escape hatch, then the Args list. No filler sentences; every line adds 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?

No output schema exists but none is needed for a delete, and the 'irreversible' consequence plus preview path cover the critical decision factors. Remaining minor gap is the absence of any error/failure behavior or permission requirements for a high-risk mutation.

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%, so the description carries full burden and it does document all five parameters (pool_name, image_name, snap_name, dry_run, target), including the 'omit for the default' behavior of target. Descriptions are terse but sufficient to disambiguate each argument.

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 and resource ('Delete an RBD image snapshot') plus a severity tag '[WRITE][risk=high]', making it trivially distinguishable from rbd_snapshot_create, rbd_image_delete, and the read-only siblings. An agent can identify scope without opening the schema.

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?

'Pass dry_run=True to preview' gives an actionable operating instruction, but there is no guidance on when to choose this tool versus alternatives such as rbd_image_delete or undo_apply, nor any stated prerequisites/permissions. Usage is implied rather than framed.

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