delete_database

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the destructive nature is known. The description adds an authorization requirement ('Requires database and destructive access'), which is a useful behavioral note. However, it does not explain the consequences of deletion (e.g., whether data is permanently removed or if related objects are affected).

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 consists of two short sentences that convey the operation and a key requirement. There is no redundancy or filler; every word is functional.

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 operation, the description is quite minimal. It covers the basic action and an authorization note, but lacks information about the permanence of deletion or error cases. Given the annotations already flag destructiveness, the description is minimally sufficient but not rich.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, and the description provides no details about the two parameters. The agent cannot learn that database_id is required or what server_id does from the description. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 a specific verb ('Delete') and resource ('a database'), which precisely states the action and object. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that operate on other resources like files or backups.

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 like create_database or rotate_database_password. The only requirement mentioned is 'database and destructive access', which is more a prerequisite than a usage directive. The agent must infer usage from the tool name and sibling context.

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