aws_resource_delete

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

The description discloses the async behavior, the default IN_PROGRESS status, the awaitCompletion option, and the destructive nature. It aligns with annotations (destructiveHint true). It adds significant context beyond annotations, such as the polling parameters and warning to double-check identifier.

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 composed of three concise sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: stating the function, explaining the async behavior and key parameters, and providing a safety warning. No extraneous information.

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?

The description covers the core workflow (async vs sync) and warns about destruction. Given the complexity (9 params, no output schema), it adequately describes the return format (ProgressEvent) and polling mechanism. Missing details about error handling or ProgressEvent fields are mitigated by the schema and industry knowledge.

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 how parameters like awaitCompletion, pollIntervalMs, and maxWaitMs interact, and reinforces the idempotency token role. This improves the agent's understanding of parameter usage.

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 verb 'Delete', the resource type 'AWS resource via Cloud Control API', and distinguishes it from sibling tools like aws_resource_create, aws_resource_update, etc. It is specific and unambiguous.

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 async default and how to use awaitCompletion for synchronous polling, and mentions the alternative polling via aws_resource_status. It warns about destructive nature. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or provide alternatives for complex scenarios.

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