destroy_service

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden. It warns of destructive, irreversible behavior and requires explicit confirmation. This is strong transparency, though it could mention additional effects like cascading deletions or user permissions.

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 well-structured sentences. The warning emoji draws attention. No wasted words. Every part of the description adds useful information.

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 destructive nature, the description covers the essential behavioral aspect (irreversibility) and the required safety measure (confirmation). It is complete for its purpose; no output schema or return value details are necessary.

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?

Input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions. The description adds value by specifying the exact value required for 'confirm' ('CONFIRMO') and repeating its mandatory nature, which goes beyond schema definition.

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?

Description clearly states the action: 'Remove permanentemente o serviço e seus dados' (permanently removes the service and its data). Verb 'destroy' and resource 'service' are explicit. Distinguishes from siblings by emphasizing irreversible destruction and requiring specific confirmation.

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 includes the mandatory confirmation string, which is a usage guideline. However, it does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like delete_project or destroy_database. No exclusion criteria or prerequisites mentioned.

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