rca_model_delete

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

Annotations provide destructiveHint=true, and the description adds that deletion is permanent and requires confirm=true. This additional context (permanence, safeguard) goes beyond what annotations already convey.

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 sentences, no redundancy. The verb 'delete' comes first, and the requirement 'confirm=true' is placed immediately. Every word 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?

For a destructive tool with output schema (not described), the description covers key points (permanence, confirmation) but omits return value, idempotency implications, and differences from other delete tools. Adequate but with gaps.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It only mentions the 'confirm' parameter, ignoring 'token', 'model_id', and 'client_id'. No details on format, constraints, or how they affect behavior.

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 tool deletes a model permanently from registry and storage, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like rca_model_create, rca_model_list, and rca_model_update_status.

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 implies deletion is destructive and requires confirmation but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., deactivating via rca_model_update_status). No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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