delete_dtm

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly reveals the key side effect: deleting a DTM also deletes its children. It does not mention irreversibility or permissions, but the destructive scope is clearly stated.

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 a single compact sentence with no filler. The operation and resource are front-loaded, and the parenthetical scope note efficiently communicates the most important nuance.

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, no-output-schema tool, the description covers the target resource, the selection mechanism, and the destructive scope. It could add an explicit warning about irreversibility or return behavior, but the definition is otherwise sufficient for correct invocation.

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 schema provides only a string parameter named 'name' with no description (0% coverage), so the description must supply meaning. The phrase 'by name' tells the agent that the required parameter identifies the DTM to delete. It does not detail name matching rules, but that is unnecessary for a single simple parameter.

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 states a specific verb ('Delete'), a concrete resource ('DTM'), the scope ('and its children'), and the selection criterion ('by name'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling deletion tools like delete_variable or delete_section.

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 provides clear context: use this tool to remove a DTM and its children from the topology by name. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state exclusions, but the resource scoping is unambiguous enough for an agent to select it correctly.

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