Delete one application version

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

Annotations already mark it destructive/idempotent/openWorld, but the description adds real value beyond them: the running-deployment refusal, that the image is retained in the registry, and that the action is irreversible requiring confirmation. These are operational traits not encoded in 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?

Front-loads the action and scope, then layers in the refusal condition, alternative, and irreversibility. Every sentence carries information; no filler.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description covers safety, refusal behavior, and consequence of deletion thoroughly enough for a destructive single-target operation. Nothing essential for correct invocation is missing.

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 both required parameters and their meanings are already documented. The description's 'Exactly one exact version name' reinforces the version parameter's exactness but adds little beyond what the schema states.

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 one version of an application') and scopes it to a single exact version. It distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly naming edgegap_delete_registry_tag for the image and implying it differs from delete_app.

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?

Gives the use case ('clean up test versions'), an explicit refusal condition ('refused while any deployment of that version is running'), and routes the agent to the alternative for the container image. Confirmation guidance when the version wasn't created in-conversation adds clear when-to-be-cautious direction.

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