vnet_delete

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It explicitly warns that deletion removes all subnets and peerings, which is a key behavioral trait. The operation's destructiveness is clear, though other details like authorization needs are omitted.

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, with only three lines. It front-loads the action and critical warning, wasting no words.

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 tool is a simple deletion with two parameters and no annotations, the description covers the core functionality, required parameters, and a crucial behavioral warning. An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. This is sufficiently complete for an agent.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It provides basic semantics: 'name: Virtual network name' and 'resource_group: Resource group containing the VNet'. This adds value beyond the property names, though minimally.

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 'Delete a virtual network' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like vnet_create, vnet_list, and subnet operations by the deletion action and the warning about cascading effects.

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 deleting a virtual network with awareness of consequences (subnets/peerings removed), but does not explicitly state when to use or avoid this tool versus alternatives. The warning provides some guidance but not full usage context.

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