delete_backup

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It identifies a destructive action, but does not disclose whether the deletion is permanent, whether backup data is removed from disk, whether there are any safety checks, or what the response contains. The endpoint detail is useful but does not substitute for behavioral context.

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 a single, tightly worded sentence that communicates the action, the target resource, and the HTTP endpoint with no filler or redundant 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?

For a one-parameter destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient for an agent to know what the tool does and what input it needs. However, it omits important behavioral context such as irreversibility, side effects, or whether confirmation is returned, which leaves a meaningful gap for a delete operation.

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 schema fully documents the single 'name' parameter and already notes 'Backup name, from list_backups,' so baseline is 3. The description itself adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, but high schema coverage means the description does not need to compensate.

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 a Tdarr database backup') and the resource, and includes the concrete endpoint (POST /api/v2/delete-backup). This makes it immediately distinguishable from backup-related siblings like list_backups, create_backup, get_backup_status, and reset_backup_status.

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 — use this tool when you want to delete a backup — but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or how it compares to related backup tools. The parameter schema mentions 'from list_backups,' but the description itself provides no routing or prerequisite guidance.

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