delete_config

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond what the annotations already provide. The annotations indicate destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the agent knows the operation is destructive and idempotent. The description merely restates the action without mentioning permanence, impact on active tasks, or failure behavior.

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 short sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it easy to parse. For a simple delete tool with one parameter, this length is appropriate.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity and the annotations covering destructive and idempotent behavior, the description is minimally adequate. However, there is no output schema and no mention of return values, side effects, or prerequisites. A sentence about permanent deletion or behavior for non-existent config IDs would improve completeness.

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 for the undocumented config_id parameter. It does not; it simply says 'delete a scrape configuration' without explaining what config_id refers to, how to obtain it, or any constraints. The parameter name is self-explanatory but the description adds no value beyond the schema.

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 'Delete a scrape configuration' clearly identifies the verb (delete) and the resource (scrape configuration), distinguishing it from sibling delete tools for schemas, storage configs, and schedules. This is a specific and unambiguous action statement.

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 usage: when you need to delete a scrape configuration, this is the tool. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or point to alternatives like delete_schema or delete_storage_config. The resource type is clear, so usage is implied rather than absent.

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