delete_openvpn_server

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true, but the description adds 'WARNING: This is irreversible', clarifying that the operation cannot be undone—a behavioral trait beyond the annotation. No contradiction with annotations. It does not detail cascading effects, but the irreversibility warning adds substantial context.

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 minimal and front-loaded: one sentence stating the action plus a warning. Every word contributes, with no filler or 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?

Given the rich schema (100% parameter coverage) and annotations (destructiveHint), the description covers the essential purpose and the key risk of irreversibility. It doesn't explain the confirm/dry_run pattern, but those are well documented in the schema, so the tool definition as a whole is complete enough. Lacks usage context, but that's covered in another dimension.

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%, with each parameter (server_id, confirm, dry_run, apply_immediately) already described meaningfully. The description doesn't need to add parameter details and doesn't, so it neither helps nor hurts. Baseline 3 applies.

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 an OpenVPN server instance by ID'), specifying both the verb and the resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like delete_openvpn_client and update_openvpn_server. The irreversible warning adds urgency.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention using search_openvpn_servers to find the server_id, nor does it state when not to use it. No exclusions or alternatives are referenced.

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