storage_container_delete

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

With no annotations, the description carries full transparency burden. It clearly labels the tool as '[WRITE][risk=high]' and 'Destructive', details the audit trail capture of prior capacity/RF, and explains the dry_run safety mechanism. This fully discloses the tool's impact and side effects.

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 well-organized with a summary line, risk note, audit info, and an Args section. It is concise given the amount of critical information, though the audit detail could be slightly trimmed. Overall, it earns its sentences.

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?

Given no annotations and no output schema, the description provides everything needed: purpose, behavior, parameter semantics, and audit context. It covers the essentials of a destructive delete operation, making it self-contained and complete for selection and 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%, so the description must explain parameters. It does so thoroughly: ext_id is defined as from storage_container_list, dry_run as a preview mode, and target as an optional Prism Central name. This adds complete meaning beyond the bare 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 explicitly states 'Delete a storage container' and notes 'Destructive', clearly identifying the verb and resource. Compared to siblings like storage_container_list, storage_container_create, and storage_container_update, this tool's deletion purpose is distinct and unambiguous.

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 strongly advises 'pass dry_run=True first' to preview deletion, providing a clear safety guideline. It also explains the high-risk audit requirement, helping the agent decide when caution is needed. While sibling alternatives are not explicitly listed, the dry_run recommendation effectively guides safe usage.

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