Delete Policy Window

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true. The description adds 'permanently', which reinforces the destructive nature but does not elaborate on side effects, authorization needs, or what happens to associated data. With annotations covering the core traits, the description's added value is marginal.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. However, it could include brief parameter guidance without sacrificing conciseness. Overall, it efficiently conveys the core action.

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 the presence of an output schema, return values are not needed. However, for a delete operation with 3 parameters (only 1 required), the description omits context on how to identify the window and the role of optional parameters. The agent needs external knowledge to use the tool correctly.

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 by explaining parameters. It provides no details about window_uuid (how to obtain it), org_uuid (what it does, why optional), or request_id (purpose). The description adds no semantic 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 uses 'Delete' as a specific verb and identifies the resource as 'a maintenance/exclusion window', with 'permanently' clarifying the outcome. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like create_policy_window, update_policy_window, and get_policy_window.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to delete vs. update or check). There are no prerequisites or context about policy windows or the required window_uuid.

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