Delete Collection

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses the destructive nature: permanent, irreversible, deletes entire directory and registry entry, and restricts to collection roots. It also mentions no recovery through the server. This covers all critical behavioral traits.

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?

Three concise sentences: first states the core action and scope, second adds irreversibility, third provides a safety condition and an alternative. No redundant words, well-structured and front-loaded.

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 destructive tool with no output schema and no annotations, this description is fully complete: it explains the exact effect, the validation constraint, and the alternative tool. Sibling context is addressed by naming unregister_collection. Nothing essential is missing.

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 descriptions cover 100% of parameters, so the description does not need to repeat them. It adds no new parameter-specific semantics beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., the confirm flag requirement and path guidance are already in the schema). Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 tool permanently deletes a Bruno collection including its directory and registry entry, and distinguishes it from unregister_collection which only stops listing. The verb 'delete' plus resource 'collection' and specific scope (directory + registry) makes the purpose unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (permanent deletion) and when not to (if you want to keep files, use unregister_collection). Also provides a safety condition: only collection roots are valid, preventing misuse. This is exemplary guidance.

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