profilarr_delete_database

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

The description goes well beyond the destructiveHint annotation by itemizing exactly what is destroyed: the row, the cloned repo on disk, and scheduled sync jobs. This adds valuable context about the tool's side effects and irreversible actions.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the verb 'Unlink' and efficiently lists all three consequences. There is no redundant or unnecessary 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 simple destructive tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers the essential behavior and side effects. The presence of the destructive annotation and output schema complements the description, making it sufficiently 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 description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explicitly explain the 'id' parameter. However, the sole parameter is an integer 'id' and the tool name plus description make it clear it refers to the database identifier. The description provides no additional detail beyond the schema, but the meaning is inferable.

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 ('Unlink a database') and lists specific consequences (removes row, deletes cloned repo, cancels sync jobs). It distinguishes the tool from sibling operations like update_database or sync_database by specifying the destructive nature and scope.

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 for permanently removing a database, but it does not explicitly state when to choose this over alternatives or mention any exclusions. The context is clear enough, but no explicit guidance is provided.

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