boxes.undefine

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states that storage is not deleted, which is critical. However, it omits other behavioral aspects such as whether the domain must be inactive, what happens to snapshots, or if the operation is reversible. Not fully transparent, but the storage caveat is valuable.

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 conveys the essential purpose and a critical caveat with zero waste. It is highly concise while retaining clarity.

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 complexity (2 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description covers the primary purpose and storage behavior but misses important contextual details like preconditions (e.g., domain state), side effects on other metadata, and any error scenarios. It is minimally adequate but not fully complete.

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%, so both parameters are already documented. The description's note about storage not being deleted reinforces the default of keepStorage=true, adding slight clarity beyond the schema's 'Keep storage (default: true)' but not introducing new information. Baseline 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 a specific verb ('Undefine'), resource ('a domain'), and the precise effect ('remove from libvirt'), plus a key qualifier ('Storage is NOT deleted'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like start, shutdown, or snapshots without ambiguity.

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 does not specify when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites (e.g., domain must be shut down). It simply states what it does, leaving the agent to infer appropriate context from the name and sibling list.

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