Delete firecracker snapshot

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds the billing consequence ('stops its keep billing') and the authorization requirement, which the annotations do not cover. It stops short of stating irreversibility or what happens to the underlying snapshot data.

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?

A single tight sentence with the action front-loaded and the qualifying details (billing impact, permissions) appended. No filler or repetition.

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 two-parameter destructive mutation with full annotation coverage and no output schema, the description covers the essentials: what it deletes, the billing effect, and the auth prerequisites. Only irreversibility/recovery behavior is left unstated.

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 coverage is 100%, so both orderNo and snapshot_id are fully documented in the schema, including a pointer to list_firecracker_snapshots as the source of snapshot_id. The description adds no parameter-level detail, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete a Firecracker VPS temporary snapshot') with a concrete consequence ('stops its keep billing'). It does not, however, distinguish this from the sibling delete_snapshot, so an agent must infer that this targets Firecracker temporary snapshots specifically from the name alone.

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?

Gives valuable prerequisites ('Requires services:manage and a full-access API key'), which is actionable context. It does not say when to prefer this over delete_snapshot or rollback_firecracker_snapshot, so alternative-selection guidance is only implied by the name.

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