config_delete

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, but the description adds critical behavior the annotations cannot express: the deletion is persisted to the database and applied asynchronously by the scheduler, and the call cannot confirm liveness. That timing caveat materially changes how an agent should report results to a user.

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?

Three short sentences, each earning its place: the action, the alternative routing, and the async caveat. Front-loaded with the core action and no filler.

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 single-item mutation with no output schema, the description covers the essential concerns: specificity, the bulk alternative, and the deferred-application semantics. What remains unsaid (permission requirements, behavior on a non-existent snippet, error modes) is minor but not trivial.

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 100% – all three parameters carry their own descriptions including name format rules and the global-service convention. The description adds no parameter-level semantics beyond what the schema states, so the baseline 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?

The description uses a specific verb and resource ('Delete one custom config snippet') and immediately scopes the cardinality to a single item, which distinguishes it from configs_delete_bulk. An agent can select it without opening the schema.

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 names the explicit alternative for the multi-item case ('Use configs_delete_bulk for several'), giving clear routing guidance. It stops short of stating prerequisites or when-not conditions beyond the bulk case, so it is not a full 5.

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