boxes.snapshots.delete

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It merely states 'Delete a snapshot' but does not reveal that the operation is permanent and irreversible, nor does it mention potential failure conditions (e.g., snapshot not found, domain in use). This is a significant omission for a destructive action.

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, direct sentence that is appropriately concise. It is front-loaded and wastes no words, achieving maximum efficiency. Every word contributes to the meaning without 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?

For a destructive operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too minimal. It lacks information about required conditions, side effects, error handling, or results. An agent would not know whether the deletion is idempotent, what happens if the snapshot is in use, or how the operation might fail. This incompleteness is unwarranted given the tool's simplicity.

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 has 100% coverage, meaning both parameters (snapshot and nameOrUuid) already have descriptive definitions. The description adds no extra information about the parameters, so the baseline score of 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?

The description 'Delete a snapshot' is a specific verb-resource pair that unambiguously identifies the action. It clearly distinguishes this tool from sibling snapshot tools like list, create, and revert, all of which have different verbs. There is no ambiguity about what it does.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites such as the snapshot existing or the domain being stopped, nor does it indicate when one should prefer revert or create over delete. An agent must infer usage from the tool name and parameters alone, with no explicit direction.

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