pt_delete_devices

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the agent knows this is a destructive operation. The description adds valuable context that cables are also deleted, which is beyond the annotation. However, it does not state irreversibility, permission requirements, or what happens if a named device does not exist.

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 front-loaded sentence with zero waste. It states the action and the key side effect immediately.

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 destructive operation with no output schema and an undocumented required parameter, the description is too sparse. It should clarify irreversibility, cable deletion scope, and behavior for invalid or missing device names.

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?

There is one required parameter ('names') with 0% schema description coverage, so the description must compensate but does not. It does not explain whether names refer to device names, whether multiple devices can be deleted, matching behavior, or error handling for missing names.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('Delete devices') and clarifies scope with '(and their cables).' This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like pt_add_devices and pt_update_device, though it does not name alternatives explicitly.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as pt_update_device, pt_clear_canvas, or pt_remove? No prerequisites or warnings are stated. The usage is only implied by the verb 'Delete'.

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