pve_delete_group

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. 'Delete a group' implies a destructive, irreversible mutation, but it doesn't specify permissions required, side effects (e.g., impact on users in the group), error conditions, or confirmation prompts. This is inadequate for a destructive tool with zero annotation coverage.

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 extremely concise at three words, with zero wasted language. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly. This is an example of efficient communication where every word earns its place.

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?

Given the tool's destructive nature, lack of annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It should address safety considerations, expected outcomes, or error handling. For a deletion tool in a system like Proxmox VE, more context is needed to guide the agent effectively, making this insufficient for the complexity involved.

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 100% description coverage, with the single parameter 'groupid' documented as 'Group ID'. The description doesn't add any parameter details beyond this, but with high schema coverage and only one parameter, the baseline is strong. No additional semantics are needed, so a score of 4 reflects that the schema sufficiently handles parameter documentation.

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 'Delete a group' clearly states the action (delete) and resource (group), which is specific enough to understand the basic function. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling deletion tools like pve_delete_user or pve_delete_pool, nor does it specify what type of group (e.g., user group, HA group) in the Proxmox VE context, making it somewhat vague.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., group must exist, no dependencies), exclusions (e.g., cannot delete if in use), or related tools like pve_list_groups or pve_create_group, leaving the agent without context for proper selection.

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