panelica_databases_delete_v1_databases_id

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

Beyond the destructiveHint annotation, the description adds a clear warning that the operation permanently removes the resource and specifies the required scope. This tells the agent this is irreversible and identifies the auth need, going beyond the structured hints.

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 short and front-loads the core action before HTTP, category, scope, and warning lines. Each line carries useful operational information, though 'Category: Databases' is somewhat redundant with the tool name.

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 delete operation with no output schema, the description covers the endpoint, required scope, and destructive irreversibility. It could mention response/status expectations, but the core call information is complete.

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 coverage is 100%, and the single id parameter is already described as 'Path parameter: id'. The description's HTTP path shows :id but adds no additional semantic meaning 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 'Delete database' with the HTTP method and path, clearly identifying the verb and resource. It is easily distinguished from sibling database tools like get/post databases, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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?

There is no guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives, such as the database get or create tools. It does provide a required scope (databases:delete), but that is an authorization prerequisite rather than usage direction.

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