delete_job

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

No annotations provided, so the description fully bears the transparency burden. It explicitly marks the operation as WRITE, risk=high, and states no undo. It also discloses that pods are deleted along with the job, which is critical behavior.

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 concise and well-structured. It front-loads the risk warning and then lists arguments in a clear format. Every sentence serves a purpose, and there is no unnecessary text.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, risk, parameters, and dry-run capability. However, it does not describe the return value or confirmation message upon deletion. Given the absence of an output schema, a brief note on what happens after deletion would improve completeness.

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 must explain parameters. It does so comprehensively for all four parameters: name, namespace, dry_run, and target. Each parameter has a clear explanation that adds value beyond the 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?

The description clearly states it deletes a job and its pods, with a high-risk warning. The verb 'delete' matches the tool name, and it distinguishes from siblings like delete_pod and delete_deployment by specifying 'job and its pods'.

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 includes a risk warning and recommends using dry_run for preview. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., delete_pod for individual pods). The guidance is clear but could be more precise.

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