delete_freeradius_client

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds explicit irreversibility warning ('WARNING: This is irreversible'), which is valuable additional behavioral context beyond the annotation. It does not mention the confirm safety gate, but that is already documented in the parameter schema.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the action, followed by a concise warning. It contains no filler and is appropriately sized for a destructive operation.

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 detailed schema and annotations, the description is nearly complete. It conveys the core purpose and irreversibility. However, it does not explicitly mention the need to set confirm=true or that dry_run is available for preview, though these are in the schema. A bit more context could 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 coverage is 100% with detailed descriptions for all four parameters, including confirmation, dry run, client ID, and apply_immediately. The description only adds 'by ID', which aligns with client_id but no additional semantic value beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate given the high schema coverage.

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 a FreeRADIUS client by ID.' It specifies the verb (delete), the resource (FreeRADIUS client), and the identifier method (by ID). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_freeradius_clients, create_freeradius_client, and update_freeradius_client.

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 (i.e., to delete a specific FreeRADIUS client) but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or mention prerequisites such as looking up the ID via search_freeradius_clients. It provides no exclusions or alternative tool recommendations, though the purpose is self-evident.

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