VPS_deleteProjectV1

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It clearly states the operation is irreversible and deletes all project data, including networks, volumes, and images. It could be improved by mentioning permissions or confirmation requirements, but the core destructive nature is well communicated.

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 concise with three sentences, front-loading the primary action. Every sentence adds value: the first explains what it does, the second emphasizes irreversibility, and the third provides usage guidance. No unnecessary words.

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 simple delete tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description is largely complete. It covers the outcome, irreversibility, and cleanup. It could be slightly more complete by hinting at the return value (e.g., success status), but that is not critical.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema provides for the two parameters (projectName, virtualMachineId). No extra context is given for parameter values or constraints.

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 tool removes a Docker Compose project, stopping containers and cleaning up resources. It uses a specific verb ('removes') and resource ('Docker Compose project'), and the scope is well-defined. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like VPS_createNewProjectV1 or VPS_updateProjectV1.

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 explicitly says 'Use this when you want to permanently remove a project and free up system resources,' providing clear context for when to use it. However, it does not mention when not to use it or any alternatives, though no alternative delete tool exists for projects.

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