delete_repository

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It notably mentions 'Existing backups remain in storage,' which is a key side effect. However, it does not mention other potential consequences such as whether dependent jobs/schedules are affected, irreversibility, or required permissions.

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 compact, front-loaded with the core action, and includes a brief Args section. Every sentence provides useful information without redundancy, making it highly efficient.

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 one-parameter delete tool, the description adequately covers the action, parameter, and a key behavioral consequence. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to explain return values, and the description seems sufficiently complete for its complexity.

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 description adds significant meaning to the lone 'index' parameter: it specifies the index is 0-based and explains how to obtain it via get_backup_status. This goes well beyond the schema's minimal 'type: integer' and compensates for the 0% schema_description_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?

The description clearly states 'Delete a repository configuration' with a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_storage, delete_schedule, and delete_job, which target different resources.

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 when to use it—when you need to delete a repository configuration—and even adds a hint about getting the index from get_backup_status. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or state when not to use it, leaving usage context mostly implicit.

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