delete_notify_group

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses one genuinely valuable trait — that an HA restart is required — but omits reversibility, required permissions, behavior when the named group does not exist, and whether the restart is immediate or deferred.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with the operative verb first and the operational caveat second. No filler, nothing to trim.

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 one-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers the action and one critical side effect but says nothing about failure modes, permanence of the deletion, or the practical consequence of the restart requirement. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 single required parameter "name" has 0% schema description coverage and is never mentioned in the description. The meaning is inferable from the tool purpose, but neither the schema nor the description clarifies format, matching rules, or whether it is a display name or an internal identifier.

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 a notify group"), which is unambiguous and clearly distinct from the sibling upsert_notify_group. It does not explicitly name or contrast siblings, but the delete semantics make the boundary self-evident.

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 parenthetical "(HA restart required)" gives an important prerequisite/postcondition, which is more than many siblings provide. However, it offers no guidance on when to use this versus alternatives like upsert_notify_group or whether pre-checks (e.g., group in use) are needed.

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