delete_lab

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It explicitly states irreversibility, which is a key behavioral trait beyond the input schema. However, it omits details about permissions, side effects on running processes, or error conditions.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two short sentences with no redundant information. It is front-loaded with the key action and immediately follows with the critical behavioral warning.

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 simplicity of the tool (1 parameter) and the existence of an output schema, the description is still incomplete. It fails to explain the parameter's semantics, what happens when the lab doesn't exist, or how to confirm deletion. More context is needed for safe usage.

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 one parameter (lab_path) with 0% schema description coverage, and the tool description adds no explanation of what lab_path means (e.g., format, how to obtain it). The description fails to compensate for the missing schema documentation.

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 resource ('a lab from the EVE-NG server'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_lab or get_lab. However, it does not specify whether the deletion applies to running or saved labs, which could add clarity.

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 warns that the action is irreversible but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as stopping a lab or removing nodes. No prerequisites or context for use are given.

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