delete_environment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the file is permanently removed from disk, which discloses irreversibility. However, it does not mention any side effects, such as whether a running server is stopped or if authorization is needed, which would be useful for an agent. The irreversibility is a key behavioral trait.

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 extremely concise with two sentences, conveying all necessary information without any wasted words. It is front-loaded with the action and identifier.

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 simple delete operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description is nearly complete. It covers the core behavior (permanent deletion). However, it could mention implications for running servers or permissions, which are not covered. Given the simplicity, it is sufficient for most use cases.

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 coverage is 100%, and the parameter is fully described in the schema. The description adds no additional semantics beyond the schema, aligning with the baseline score of 3.

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 action (delete a Mockoon environment by UUID) and specifies the resource (environment file). It distinguishes from siblings like create_environment or delete_route by focusing on environment deletion.

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?

No explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The description implies a straightforward delete operation but does not mention prerequisites, such as stopping a running server before deletion, nor does it provide alternatives. This is a basic delete operation, so lack of guidelines is acceptable but not exceptional.

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