remnawave_infra_billing_delete_provider

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

The description labels it a 'mutation' but provides no details on side effects, required permissions, or consequences (e.g., cascading deletions). With no annotations, the agent must infer behavior from the name alone.

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?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence that efficiently conveys the resource and action. Every word is necessary with no redundancy.

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?

Despite having no output schema and 0% parameter coverage, the description does not explain how to identify the provider, what the deletion returns, or whether it is reversible. This leaves significant gaps for a mutation tool.

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?

None of the 4 parameters (payload, confirmToken, responseMode, mutationApproved) are described in the schema or description. The agent receives no guidance on how to populate the payload object or use the confirmation flow.

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 action 'delete' and the resource 'provider' within the infra billing context, distinguishing it from siblings like create or list. However, it does not specify what identifies the provider (e.g., ID) or the scope of deletion.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'remnawave_infra_billing_update_provider' or 'remnawave_infra_billing_list_providers'. The description lacks any context for selection.

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