delete_secret

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is well covered externally. The description adds the endpoint and confirms the secret is removed from the account, but it does not add further behavioral context such as irreversibility, dependencies, authorization requirements, or response behavior.

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 short lines with the operation and endpoint front-loaded, and every part contributes to identifying the action. There is no unnecessary text.

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?

The description plus annotations and schema identify the resource, required identifier, destructive nature, idempotency, and endpoint. It is sufficient for invoking a simple delete, though it does not mention downstream impact or what the deletion call returns.

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%, and the secretId parameter is already documented in the schema as 'The id of the secret'. The description reinforces that the operation is by id and cites the path template, but does not add syntax, format, or validation details beyond 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?

The description states a specific verb (Delete), resource (secret), and identifier (by id), and the endpoint reinforces the exact operation. It is clearly distinct from sibling secret tools such as retrieve_secret, create_secret, and update_secret.

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 implies usage by saying it removes a specific secret from the account, but it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no alternative or prerequisite behavior. For a straightforward delete operation the implied use is adequate, but it does not actively route the agent among siblings.

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