vast_delete_schedule

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only restates the operation ('Delete') without disclosing any behavioral traits such as permanence, impact on associated data, or requirements for deletion. The description adds no context beyond what the name already implies.

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 sentence with no redundant wording. It is concise and front-loaded, though minimal.

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 and no output schema, the description is insufficiently complete. It omits critical context such as whether deletion is permanent, what happens to associated schedules, and any constraints on when to delete.

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 schema covers the single parameter 'id' with description 'VAST schedule ID'. The tool description does not add any additional meaning about the parameter, so the baseline of 3 applies for high schema coverage.

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 uses a specific verb 'Delete' and resource 'VAST schedule', clearly distinguishing this from sibling tools like vast_get_schedule, vast_create_schedule, and vast_update_schedule. The 'vast' prefix differentiates it from the generic delete_schedule tool.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool, prerequisites, or alternatives. It does not mention that this should be used only for VAST schedules (vs. regular schedules) or indicate any dependency on schedule state.

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