supervisor_delete_backup

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Delete a backup', implying destruction but without clarifying irreversibility, required permissions, or potential side effects. The presence of an output schema is not mentioned, and the description falls short of informing the agent of the permanent nature of the 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 extremely concise, consisting of a single, front-loaded sentence that gets straight to the point. Every word is necessary and there is no superfluous information.

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 simplicity (1 parameter, output schema present), the description is bare-minimum adequate. However, it lacks details about preconditions (e.g., backup must exist, cannot be currently restoring) and any safety considerations suitable for a destructive operation. The tool is part of a larger supervisor suite, and more context would help an agent use it safely.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should add meaning beyond the schema. It mentions 'by slug' but does not elaborate on what a slug is or how to obtain it. This provides minimal additional value over the schema field name 'slug'.

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 'Delete a backup by slug.' It uses a specific verb ('delete') and identifies the resource ('backup'), effectively distinguishing it from sibling tools like supervisor_create_backup, supervisor_restore_backup, and supervisor_list_backups.

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, nor does it mention any prerequisites or conditions (e.g., backup must exist, not currently in use). A simple delete operation still benefits from context on when it is appropriate.

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