automod_delete_rule

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, but the description goes further by stating the operation is irreversible, requiring __confirm:true and MCP_DRY_RUN=false for actual deletion, and specifying the return payload. This adds critical safety context beyond the annotations.

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 well-structured with bolded labels, front-loaded purpose, and every sentence contributes meaning. It is compact yet comprehensive—five short sections covering purpose, usage, return, and security in fewer than 100 words.

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 operation, the description covers all key aspects: purpose, alternative, irreversibility, confirmation mechanism, return format, and dry-run behavior. The sibling list and schema enrich the context further, making this fully self-contained for safe invocation.

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 the schema fully documents each parameter. The description adds value by explaining the purpose and triggering mechanism of __confirm, which is not obvious from the schema alone. It does not describe audit_reason, but the schema already covers it.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Delete an AutoMod rule.' It immediately flags 'DESTRUCTIVE - IRREVERSIBLE' and distinguishes from the sibling tool automod_modify_rule by explaining when to use the alternative. This makes the tool's purpose unambiguous and well-scoped.

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?

Provides explicit 'When to use' and 'When NOT to use' sections, including a concrete alternative (automod_modify_rule with enabled:false) for temporary disabling. This is model behavior for guiding tool selection.

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