Delete Proxy Host

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses irreversibility ("cannot be undone"), the external side effect ("NPM applies the configuration change"), the return value, and a safe-preview mode via dry_run. It stops short of stating required permissions or auth, but the destructive/reversibility profile is fully covered.

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?

Three tight sentences with the destructive action front-loaded, then the alternative, then the safety valve. Every sentence carries information an agent needs; 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?

For a two-parameter destructive tool with an output schema present, the description covers the destructive semantics, the alternative path, the ID source, and the dry-run escape hatch. Nothing required 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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description's notes on id (confirm via the list tool) and dry_run (preview the exact request) largely restate what the schema already documents, adding no new syntax, format, or constraint detail.

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 names a specific verb and resource ("Permanently delete a proxy host by ID") and clarifies scope by stating it removes "its configured domain routing from NPM." An agent can distinguish it from update_proxy_host or disable_proxy_host without opening any schema.

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?

It explicitly routes to the alternative ("Use disable_proxy_host to stop routing while keeping the host") and names a helper for obtaining the required ID ("list_proxy_hosts helps confirm the ID"). When-to-use, when-not-to-use, and an alternative are all present.

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