delete-planner-bucket

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true. The description adds the behavioral constraint of requiring the If-Match header, preventing accidental deletion without a recent ETag. This goes beyond annotations, but does not describe response behavior or idempotency.

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: a single sentence plus a tip. It front-loads the purpose immediately and provides critical usage information without any filler.

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?

While the precondition is well-addressed, the description does not explain the behavior of the excludeResponse parameter or what happens on success/failure. For a destructive tool with no output schema, some additional context on response or error conditions would improve completeness.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the workflow context for If-Match and includeHeaders, clarifying their purpose beyond the schema descriptions.

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 plannerBucket' clearly states the action (delete) and the resource (plannerBucket), distinguishing it from sibling tools like create-planner-bucket, update-planner-bucket, and get-planner-bucket.

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 tip provides explicit guidance on the critical prerequisite: the If-Match header with ETag from get-planner-bucket (using includeHeaders=true). This clearly indicates when to use the tool, though it does not explicitly state when not to use or provide alternatives.

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