delete_vm

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

Despite having no annotations, the description explicitly flags the operation as DESTRUCTIVE and states that confirm=True is required, which is critical safety information. However, it does not explain consequences like whether disks are permanently removed or if snapshots are affected, leaving some ambiguity.

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 sentences, with the destructive warning prominently placed. Every word contributes value, and the structure is efficient and immediately informative.

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 provides adequate context for a destructive operation with a safety warning, but lacks details on side effects, irreversibility, and parameter semantics. Given the absence of annotations and output schema, more specificity about consequences and prerequisites would improve completeness.

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?

The input schema has 0% parameter coverage, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning to 'purge' by saying 'purge resources' and highlights the confirm parameter via 'Requires confirm=True.' However, node and vmid are not explained, leaving half the parameters semantically undocumented.

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 the action (Delete) and the resource (QEMU virtual machine), and adds 'purge resources' to indicate scope. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like migrate_vm or stop_vm, which are semantically different operations.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as shutdown_vm or delete_container. The destructive warning implies caution, but there is no explicit context about suitable scenarios or prerequisites like VM shutdown state.

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