env_delete

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

The description adds behavioral details beyond the schema: it specifies that deleting an environment removes all its variables and deactivates it if it is active. This context is valuable given the absence of 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 concise (two sentences in Spanish) and front-loaded with the main action. Every part is relevant and adds value.

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?

The description adequately covers the deletion of the environment and its variables, plus special handling of the active environment. However, it could mention that the action is irreversible or that no confirmation is required, which would be useful for a delete operation.

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% with a description for the 'name' parameter. The tool description does not add new information about the parameter's format or constraints; it only reiterates the purpose.

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 'Elimina un entorno y todas sus variables' (deletes an environment and all its variables), which is a specific verb and resource. It differentiates from sibling tools like env_get (retrieve) and env_create (create) by focusing on deletion.

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 does not provide guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like env_switch or env_rename. Usage is implied (when deletion is needed), but no exclusions or alternative references are given.

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