delete_sc_repo

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true. The description adds a precondition (no users/bindings) that affects behavior, but does not disclose what happens if the precondition fails, whether deletion is reversible, or any other side effects. It adds marginal value beyond annotations.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler. The action and key constraint are front-loaded. Every word is necessary and earned.

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 simple single-parameter deletion tool with annotations and an output schema (implied), the description is adequate. It covers the action and a critical precondition. Could mention permanence of deletion or that the repo must exist, but not strictly required.

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% (one parameter with description 'Repository name.'). The description does not add any additional meaning or constraints about the parameter beyond what the schema provides.

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) and the resource (repository), and adds a key precondition (no users or bindings), which distinguishes it from related sibling tools like create_sc_repo or update_sc_repo.

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 a precondition (must have no users or bindings) but does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives like delete_sc_repo_user or list_sc_repo_bindings. There is no mention of when not to use it or steps to prepare the repository for deletion.

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