vm_snapshot_delete

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

Annotations already carry destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description goes beyond them by spelling out the consequence ('destroys a rollback point — no undo') and by disclosing a dry_run preview mode, which is not represented in the annotations.

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 operation class, then the critical consequence, then the preview escape hatch, then a compact Args block. No sentence is padding, and the most decision-relevant information comes first.

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 5-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers destination, consequence, preview, and every argument, so an agent can call it correctly. It stops short of noting any return value or follow-up verification, but with no output schema declared that is a minor omission.

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 compensate, and it does: all five parameters are explained with behavior, not just types (name points to vm_snapshot_list, node may be omitted for auto-location, target comes from config, dry_run previews). Only vmid's explanation ('Numeric Proxmox VM id') is largely restating the schema type.

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 precise verb+resource (delete a named snapshot from a VM) with a clear scope modifier ([WRITE], 'no undo'). An agent can distinguish it immediately from vm_snapshot_create, vm_snapshot_rollback, and vm_list_snapshots among the listed siblings.

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?

Gives actionable usage context: it cross-references vm_snapshot_list for discovering the snapshot name and offers dry_run=True as a preview path. It does not, however, contrast itself with the sibling operation vm_snapshot_rollback (the other destructive snapshot verb), so the routing guidance is clear but not exhaustive.

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