delete_floating_ip

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions that deletion unassigns from servers if attached, which is useful behavioral context. However, it doesn't disclose critical details like whether this action is reversible, requires specific permissions, has rate limits, or what happens to associated resources beyond unassignment.

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, efficient sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the core action ('Delete a floating IP') and adds essential clarification in parentheses, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 operation with no annotations, 0% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on error conditions, return values, side effects (e.g., billing implications), and doesn't fully compensate for the missing structured information, leaving gaps for safe agent use.

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 provides no information about the 'id' parameter. It doesn't explain what the ID represents (e.g., numeric identifier of the floating IP), how to obtain it, or format requirements, leaving the parameter's meaning unclear beyond the schema's type constraint.

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 ('Delete') and resource ('floating IP'), making the purpose evident. It distinguishes from 'unassign_floating_ip' by specifying that deletion also unassigns if attached, but doesn't explicitly contrast with other deletion tools like 'delete_server' or 'delete_primary_ip'.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'unassign_floating_ip' or other deletion tools. The description implies usage for removing floating IPs, but lacks context on prerequisites, consequences, or typical workflows.

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