delete_data_stream

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden, and it does disclose the two most important traits: the deletion is permanent and it cascades to all backing indices. It stops short of covering permission requirements, what happens to in-use or partially-matched streams, or whether the default cluster target matters.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the consequence. No filler, no repetition of the title, and every sentence earns its place.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and both parameters are fully documented in the schema. The destructive cascade is covered, leaving only operational details (permissions, behavior on missing/in-use streams) unaddressed for a mutation tool with no annotations.

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%, so the schema already documents both 'name' (comma-separated/wildcard) and 'cluster' (default fallback). The description's 'one or more' only loosely echoes the wildcard capability and adds no syntax or default details beyond the schema, 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete ... data streams'), which cleanly separates it from sibling delete_index and delete_document by the resource noun alone. It also clarifies scope ('one or more'), but never explicitly names a sibling or contrasts with delete_index, so it falls short of the 5 benchmark.

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 gives no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no pointer to alternatives such as delete_index or general_api_request. The only implied context is that this is for data streams, which the name already conveys.

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