Delete firewall

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

Beyond the annotations, the description discloses a major side effect: any VM with the firewall activated will automatically have it deactivated. It also labels the intended use as removing unused configurations, adding real behavioral context to the destructiveHint.

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?

Three short sentences each add distinct value: the action, the side effect on VMs, and the intended use. There is no redundancy or filler.

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 single-parameter destructive operation with no output schema, the description covers what it does, the important consequence, and when it should be used. Nothing material is missing for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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?

The schema fully describes the single firewallId parameter as 'Firewall ID,' so the description adds little parameter-level meaning. This is the appropriate baseline when schema coverage is complete.

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 first sentence, 'Delete a specified firewall,' states a specific action and resource. The name and title agree, and it is clearly differentiated from sibling tools that delete firewall rules or deactivate firewalls.

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 says to use this endpoint to remove unused firewall configurations, which provides clear intended context. However, it does not explicitly compare against VPS_deactivateFirewallV1 or VPS_deleteFirewallRuleV1, so an agent must infer the boundary between deactivating and deleting.

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