delete_late_infer

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full safety burden and does so thoroughly. It discloses the deletion scope, what is not deleted, a required confirmation flag, the stop-before-delete condition, an approval wait, and the fact that cwd/allowlist/write-directory/path parameters are not accepted.

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 and front-loaded with the primary action, then covers prerequisites, edge cases, and exclusions. The phrase 'Extra calls wait for Late Approve' is terse and slightly unclear, but there is no substantive redundancy.

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 destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description provides the necessary behavioral and safety context: what is deleted, the confirmation requirement, the serving-on-port condition, and the unsupported inputs. It does not specify success/error response details, but that is a minor gap for a delete operation.

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 the schema already fully documents model and confirm. The description restates the confirm requirement and characterizes model as a Hub org/model id, but adds no new parameter-level detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

States a specific verb ('Remove'), a specific resource ('compiled late-infer snapshot'), and a scoped location ('compiled dir only, not the Hub cache'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_local_model or pull_late_infer.

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?

Gives explicit preconditions: requires model id and confirm=true, and conditional behavior: stop first if serving on port 8010. It does not name alternative tools or say when this tool should not be used, but the scope exclusions ('not the Hub cache', 'does not delete bin/late-infer') make the intended use fairly clear.

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