Delete a pull profile

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

Goes well past the destructiveHint/idempotentHint annotations by disclosing the cascade effect (every linked version stops getting its files at boot), an API blind spot (linked versions cannot be listed), and what is explicitly left intact (the bucket and its files). That is exactly the risk information an agent needs before a destructive call.

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 consequences and caveats; nearly every clause carries information. The parenthetical about the API's inability to list links is dense but justified. Minor redundancy between "Cannot be undone" and the destructive annotation.

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 3-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers side effects, irreversibility, and a safety precondition, leaving only the response shape unstated. Little else an agent needs 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 all three parameters are already documented, including the dry_run escape hatch. The description only reinforces that the name is exact and singular ("Exactly one exact name"), which the schema already states, so it adds little beyond baseline.

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 pull profile from an Endpoint Storage") and implicitly carves itself out from edgegap_delete_endpoint_storage by noting "The bucket and its files are not touched." It does not name sibling tools explicitly, but the scope is unambiguous.

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 a clear context ("to clean up a test profile") and a concrete prerequisite caveat: consult the developer when the profile was not created in this conversation, because the API cannot list links. It stops short of naming an alternative tool or a when-not-to-use rule beyond that caveat.

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