delete_volume

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It effectively communicates critical behavioral traits: the destructive nature ('all data destroyed') and the prerequisite condition ('must be detached'). This gives the agent essential context about irreversible data loss and operational constraints.

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 and front-loaded with all essential information in a single, efficient sentence. Every word earns its place by conveying critical constraints and consequences without any 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 does well to warn about data destruction and prerequisites. However, it lacks information about permissions needed, error conditions, or what happens after deletion. Given the high-stakes nature of this operation, more context would be beneficial.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, but the description doesn't provide any parameter-specific information beyond what's implied by context. It doesn't explain what 'id' represents or its format. Since schema coverage is low, the description should compensate more, but it only adds minimal context about prerequisites.

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 ('a volume'), making the purpose immediately apparent. It distinguishes from siblings like 'detach_volume' by specifying this is a permanent deletion operation rather than detachment.

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 provides explicit usage guidance with the prerequisite 'must be detached,' which helps the agent understand when this tool is applicable. However, it doesn't explicitly mention when NOT to use it or name specific alternatives, keeping it from a perfect score.

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