Delete zone helper

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

Goes well past the annotations (destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, readOnlyHint=false): it names the underlying WS command (`zone/delete`), the two accepted id formats, the return shape (`status`, `zone_id`, raw WS `result`), and the non-raising error contract with an `error`/`hint` payload. An agent knows exactly how failures surface before calling.

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?

Front-loads the one-line purpose, then uses labeled "Calls / Use when / Returns / Errors" lines so each sentence carries distinct information. Nothing is padded and no section repeats another.

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 one-parameter destructive tool, the definition covers purpose, eligibility constraints, id formats, return shape, and error semantics. Even though an output schema exists (so return details were optional), the added error contract leaves no ambiguity about invocation.

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 coverage is 100% and the `zone_id` description already covers the id-vs-entity_id form, so the baseline would be 3. The description restates and reinforces the dual-format acceptance and ties the value's origin to `zones_list_zones`, which is marginally useful but largely duplicative of the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Delete a zone helper") and immediately scopes it: only zones created via `zones_create_zone`, while `zone.home` and YAML-defined zones reject the command. That distinction is what separates it from sibling helpers like `zones_update_zone` or `zones_reload_zones` without opening any schema.

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?

Contains an explicit "Use when" line (removing a UI-helper zone no longer needed) plus a negative condition naming the zone classes that will fail. It also points at `zones_create_zone` as the counterpart and `zones_list_zones` as the id source, so both when and when-not are covered.

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