lattice_delete_worker_volume

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behaviors. It states 'Any data stored in it is destroyed' and labels the operation as 'Destructive', which is helpful. However, it does not mention required permissions, effects on running containers, or whether the volume must be unmounted first. Partial but adequate.

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 three short, front-loaded sentences. The first sentence directly states the action, and subsequent sentences add key consequences. Every sentence is meaningful with zero waste.

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?

Given no output schema and two simple parameters, the description covers the core action and its destructive consequence. It could mention return value format or prerequisites (e.g., volume not in use), but for a straightforward deletion, it is largely sufficient.

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% (both id and name have descriptions). The description adds no parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema provides. According to guidelines, baseline is 3 when coverage is high, and no extra value is added.

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 a Docker volume on a worker'. It identifies the resource (volume) and the verb (delete), and the mention of destroyed data adds clarity about the effect. This distinguishes it from sibling creation or listing tools like lattice_create_worker_volume.

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 implies usage for deletion when the volume is no longer needed, but provides no explicit guidance on when to avoid this tool (e.g., if the volume is in use) or alternatives. It lacks when-not-to-use context, which is important for a destructive action.

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