xr18_snapshot_delete

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It clearly signals a destructive action and the confirm gate, which is useful. Yet it does not disclose irreversibility, what happens if confirm is false, or any side effects, leaving important behavioral detail unstated.

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?

Two short sentences with no filler or repetition. The core action and the critical prerequisite are both front-loaded, making the description easy to parse and act on.

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 simple two-parameter destructive command with no output schema, the description is nearly complete: it gives the slot range and the confirm requirement. It could be more complete by noting irreversibility or the no-op behavior when confirm is false, but these are minor given the tool's simplicity.

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. It adds meaning to both parameters: slot is constrained to 1-64 and confirm must be true for deletion to proceed. This goes beyond the raw integer/boolean types in the schema, though it does not fully describe confirm's default or behavior when false.

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 states the exact action (Delete), the target resource (snapshot slot), and the valid range (1-64). It is clearly distinct from sibling snapshot tools like load, save, set_scope, and set_name, so an agent can identify the right tool without opening the 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?

The description gives one explicit usage requirement: confirm=true. However, it does not explain when to choose this tool over alternatives, when not to use it, or provide any exclusion criteria. The usage guidance is implied by the tool name and sibling context rather than stated.

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