Delete Docker Host

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states the deletion is permanent and discloses the side effect on monitors' docker_host field. It does not mention error handling or permissions, but for a simple delete operation, the key behaviors are covered.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and immediately followed by the most important side effect. Every sentence adds value without redundancy, making it highly concise.

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 tool's low complexity (one parameter, no annotations), the description adequately covers the core behavior, permanence, and side effects. It leverages the output schema for return values, while the side-effect note adds needed context for a mutation tool.

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 provides 100% coverage for the single parameter dockerHostID, including its type and description. The tool description does not add additional parameter details beyond what the schema already contains, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 tool 'permanently deletes a docker daemon connection,' specifying the exact resource and action. It distinguishes itself from sibling delete tools by clarifying that monitors themselves are not deleted, which differentiates it from deleteMonitor.

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 provides context for when to use this tool by explaining the side effect on monitors: their docker_host field is cleared but monitors remain. This implies the tool is appropriate when you want to remove the connection without deleting dependent monitors. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or provide explicit when-not-to-use guidance.

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