Remove WireGuard peer

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

While annotations indicate destructiveHint:true, the description adds that it is mutating, requires --enable-write, and runs as a dry-run unless confirm:true. This goes beyond annotations.

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?

Two sentences that are front-loaded with the purpose and include essential behavioral details, with no wasted words.

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 removal tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, mutating behavior, prerequisites, and dry-run safety completely.

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% with descriptions for all three parameters. The description only reiterates the confirm parameter's effect, adding minimal extra meaning.

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 title 'Remove WireGuard peer' and description 'Remove a peer from a WireGuard interface' clearly state the specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from siblings like wg_peer_add.

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 explains the mutating nature, the requirement for --enable-write, and the dry-run unless confirm:true. This gives clear context, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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