Delete Waf Rule Tool

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden for a destructive mutation. It says nothing about irreversibility, whether confirmation is required, what happens on a missing rule_id, or required auth — only the verb "Delete" is disclosed.

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, front-loaded sentences with no filler; the operation is stated first and the constraint second. It is arguably too terse for a destructive tool, but nothing is wasted.

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 delete operation with zero annotation coverage and no output-schema explanation needed, the description should at minimum flag irreversibility or failure behavior. Instead it covers only the operation name and a parameter-exclusivity rule, leaving the agent without the safety context Deletion requires.

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 baseline is 3, and the description adds a real constraint the schema does not encode: the schema allows both zone_id and zone_name to be null, while the description requires exactly one. It still does not explain why a zone is needed alongside rule_id.

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 a WAF custom rule"), which is clearly distinguishable from the create/update/list WAF siblings. However, it never explicitly contrasts itself with those siblings or states what scope of rule is removed.

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 mutual-exclusivity rule for zone_id/zone_name is genuine usage guidance for invocation, but there is no statement of when to reach for this tool versus update_waf_rule_tool or delete_page_rule_tool, nor any prerequisite context (permissions, existing rule).

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