Delete Stack

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it says nothing about irreversibility of the deletion, required database/instance state, or what a successful call returns. 'Delete' hints at destruction but no consequences, scope of effect, or auth requirements are disclosed.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero padding. It is efficient, though the brevity reflects under-specification rather than disciplined editing.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description should disclose consequences and prerequisites. It instead stops at the verb+resource, leaving the agent to infer whether deletion is reversible, what instance it targets, and what the response contains.

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 100% — items, timeout, and instance_id are all documented in the schema, including the {function_address, name} shape of the items array. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 specific verb (delete) and resource (stack variable(s)) with a selection key ('by name'). It is clearly the inverse of the sibling declare_stack, so an agent can distinguish deletion from declaration without opening the schema.

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?

There is no when-to-use statement, no prerequisite (e.g. an open database or loaded instance), and no mention of related tools like declare_stack or stack_frame. The only guidance is implicit in the verb.

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