delete_virtual_machine

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It notes that a running VM should be stopped first, but does not state whether deletion is permanent, whether associated resources are removed, or what permissions are required. The safety-critical destructive nature is under-communicated.

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 efficient sentence with the core action and prerequisite front-loaded. There is no fluff or repetition of the tool name's obvious meaning.

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?

Although an output schema exists, this destructive operation lacks essential context such as irreversibility, permission needs, and the relationship between the parameters. The minimal prerequisite note is helpful, but the description is not complete enough for safe invocation without additional reasoning.

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 compensate, but it provides no information about name, namespace, or cluster parameters. The property names are self-explanatory, yet the description adds no semantic meaning beyond the schema field labels.

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 a VirtualMachine') and adds a key prerequisite ('stop it first if running'), making the action clear and distinct from stop/restart operations. It does not explicitly name sibling tools, but the deletion intent is unambiguous.

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?

It gives one useful precondition: stop the VM first if running. However, it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over alternatives like stop_virtual_machine, delete_resource, or unpause_virtual_machine, nor does it explain exclusions.

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