combell_scheduled_tasks_delete

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true. The description adds the explicit 'SIDE EFFECT: irreversible' note, which goes beyond the annotation by clarifying that the deletion cannot be undone. This is useful, though it does not detail permissions, cascading effects, or whether a running task is affected.

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 concise sentence followed by a brief side-effect warning. It is front-loaded with the core action and contains no filler, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 simple two-parameter delete operation, the description is largely complete: it names the resource, the target environment, and the irreversibility. It does not elaborate on return values, but no output schema exists and the absence is acceptable for a mutation. Minor gap: it could reference list/get to retrieve the scheduled_task_id.

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 needed to compensate for parameter documentation, but it does not mention domain_name or scheduled_task_id at all. The parameter names are reasonably self-explanatoryassed, but the description provides no additional meaning, format, or relationship between the identifiers.

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 states a specific action ('Delete') on a specific resource ('a scheduled task from a Linux hosting'), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like combell_scheduled_tasks_create, combell_scheduled_tasks_update, combell_scheduled_tasks_list, and combell_scheduled_tasks_get. The verb and object are 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. It does not say, for example, to use combell_scheduled_tasks_get or list first to obtain the scheduled_task_id, nor does it explain when to prefer update over delete.

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