delete_config_path

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

Even without annotations, the description discloses key behaviors: the operation is reversible, the subtree is captured first, dry_run previews, and it refuses the 'admin' subtree and config root with a clear safety rationale. This is thorough and goes beyond typical descriptions.

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: a one-sentence summary, a dry-run note, a safety/refusal explanation, and a brief Args list. Every sentence adds value without unnecessary verbosity.

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 fully equips an agent to understand what the tool does, how to invoke it safely, and what to expect. It covers purpose, behavior, and all parameters completely.

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 no descriptions, so the description's parameter explanations are essential. It clearly defines path as slash-separated, dry_run as preview, and target as an optional proxy name – adding meaning 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 the tool's function: 'Delete a caddy config subtree' – a specific verb and resource. It also notes reversibility and distinguishes it from sibling tools that set or load config values.

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?

Provides clear context for when to use the tool (to delete a config subtree) and mentions dry_run for preview. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, so it stops short of the top score.

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