Delete cipher selected post

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The one genuine addition is "permanent" (as opposed to soft-delete/trash), which is valuable, but there is no mention of auth requirements, irreversibility confirmation, or selection mechanics.

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?

It is short and front-loaded, but the parenthetical "POST alias" is cryptic and the brevity comes at the cost of any actionable 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?

A destructive bulk-delete operation with three undocumented opaque parameters and no output schema requires far more explanation than one four-word phrase. The description leaves the selection mechanism and required inputs entirely unspecified.

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?

Three parameters with 0% schema description coverage and generic names (form, params, json_body). The description says nothing about them, so the agent has no information on how to specify which ciphers get deleted.

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 the verb and scope ("Bulk permanent delete") plus the HTTP-method qualifier ("POST alias"), which is somewhat more than the name alone. But it never names the resource (ciphers) or explains what "selected" means, leaving the agent to reconstruct the target from the tool name.

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?

No guidance on when to pick this over the many near-identical siblings (delete_cipher_selected, delete_cipher_selected_put, delete_cipher_selected_admin, etc.). "POST alias" hints at a method variant but does not state the condition that selects it.

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