cloud_delete_lb_service

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. While it states the action is a removal (destructive), it omits critical details: what happens if the service doesn't exist, whether the operation is idempotent, or what remains on the load balancer after removal. The description is too sparse for a mutation tool.

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 with no wasted words. However, it could be structured to front-load more behavioral context without increasing length.

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 simple parameters and presence of an output schema (not shown), the description is minimally complete but lacks usage context and edge-case behavior. It is adequate for a straightforward delete operation but not fully informative.

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 explain both parameters. It clarifies listen_port (identifies service by port) but does not explain load_balancer_id (e.g., its purpose or how to obtain it). This leaves one parameter meaningfully undocumented.

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 uses a specific verb ('Remove') and clearly identifies the resource ('a service from a load balancer') and the identifying criterion ('by its listen port'). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like cloud_add_lb_service (adds a service) and cloud_delete_load_balancer (deletes the entire load balancer).

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 vs. alternatives such as cloud_delete_load_balancer or cloud_remove_lb_target. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., the service must exist) or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer proper usage.

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