delete_database

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. The verb "delete" implies a destructive, likely irreversible mutation, but the description does not confirm irreversibility, required permissions, or side effects (e.g., whether dependent resources are removed). This is a significant gap for an unannotated destructive operation.

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?

A single short sentence that is front-loaded and wastes no words. Its brevity is appropriate to the format, though the missing content is a specification problem rather than a conciseness one.

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, unannotated tool with no output schema and no safety metadata, the description leaves out everything an agent would want before invoking it: irreversibility, authorization needs, and side effects. It is not complete enough given the operation's risk profile.

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?

There is one parameter and schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema fully documents "id". The description adds no meaning beyond the schema, which merits the baseline 3 for high coverage.

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?

"Delete a database" states a concrete verb (delete) and resource (database), so an agent knows the operation. However, it is essentially a restatement of the tool name and offers no scope detail (soft vs hard delete, cascading behavior) that would separate it from the many other delete_* siblings (delete_dataset, delete_model, delete_worker_set).

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 when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or prerequisite guidance. For a destructive tool sitting alongside delete_dataset and delete_model, an agent gets no help on choosing this one over a sibling or on any required preconditions.

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