instance_delete

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does not state whether deletion is permanent or reversible, whether children are cascaded, what permissions are required, or what occurs on invalid targets. The qualifier 'Safely' is asserted without detailing the safeguards.

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?

One short sentence that front-loads the action and resource and adds the targeting method. No filler or redundancy.

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?

Despite the simple one-parameter schema, the destructive nature of the operation and lack of annotations/output schema require more context. The description omits side effects (e.g., cascading deletion, permanence), error behavior, and whether the instance is also removed from memory, leaving an agent underinformed for a high-stakes call.

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 already describes the 'target' parameter fully with examples and 100% coverage, so no parameter compensation is needed. The description's phrase 'by its path or session UUID' merely restates the schema's meaning without adding new semantics.

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 names the action (destroy/delete), the target resource (Instance in the Roblox DataModel), and the addressing mechanism (path or session UUID). It clearly distinguishes from transformation tools like instance_clone, instance_reparent, and instance_rename by naming the destructive verb.

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?

The description implies deletion use cases but does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives or any exclusions. The word 'Safely' hints at caution, but no alternative tools or when-not conditions are mentioned.

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