delete_agent_instance

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

The description correctly indicates the destructive nature (consistent with annotations), but adds no additional behavioral details such as side effects, reversibility, or required permissions. With annotations already setting destructiveHint: true, the description is neutral but not informative beyond that.

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 very concise at 4 words, front-loading the action and resource. However, it could include a bit more context without significantly increasing length, such as noting the requirement for both parameters.

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 the presence of an output schema and annotations, the description still lacks completeness. It does not explain return values, prerequisites (e.g., the instance must exist), or potential consequences. For a destructive tool, this leaves important 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 input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for both agent_id and instance_id. The tool description does not add any additional meaning or usage context for the parameters, so it meets the baseline without improvement.

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' and the resource 'agent instance', making the tool's purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes itself from sibling delete tools like delete_classifier or delete_collection by specifying the resource type.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., deactivating instead of deleting), nor are there prerequisites or conditions for usage. The description lacks any context about appropriate scenarios or exclusions.

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