vibemk_delete_contact_group

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral impact. It clearly indicates deletion, but does not mention side effects such as removal of group memberships, cascading effects on hosts/services, or whether confirmation is required.

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 very short and easy to parse, but repeats the same idea with 'Delete' and 'Remove'. It is not overly verbose and contains no irrelevant information.

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 with no annotations, the description lacks important context such as prerequisites, effects on associated users, or whether the operation is reversible. It is minimal and leaves the agent to infer behavior from the tool name alone.

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?

The only parameter, 'name', is fully documented in the schema with 'Group name to delete', providing clear semantic meaning. Schema coverage is 100%, and the description reinforces the parameter's role.

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 clearly states the action ('Delete') and the resource ('contact group'), making the primary purpose unambiguous. It is distinguishable from sibling tools like update_contact_group or create_contact_group, though the phrasing is slightly redundant with 'Delete' and 'Remove'.

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?

No explicit guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as update_contact_group for modifications or get_contact_groups for inspection. The usage context is only implied by the name and description.

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