delete_automation

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does add one concrete detail beyond the name: the removal happens in automations.yaml, implying a persistent config mutation rather than a transient state change. However, it omits irreversibility, permission requirements, and error behavior for unknown ids.

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?

One short sentence with the core action front-loaded and a parenthetical adding file-level context. It is efficient, though the terse parenthetical is the only added 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?

For a destructive, single-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description minimally covers what happens and where. It leaves out whether deletion is reversible, whether a reload or restart is needed for the change to take effect, and what happens on an invalid id.

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 single parameter is only referenced as 'by id', which adds no meaning beyond the schema's own 'Automation Id' title. No format, example, or lookup source is given for obtaining a valid automation_id.

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 and resource ('Delete an automation by id') and names the identifying argument, which clearly separates it from get_automation, create_or_update_automation, and trigger_automation. It stops short of explicitly differentiating from sibling deletion-style tools, but the purpose is 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?

No guidance on when to use this versus alternatives, no prerequisites (e.g. whether the automation must be disabled first), and no exclusions or warnings about irreversibility. The name makes the general intent obvious, but the description provides no usage context.

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