clear_pxe_config

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral context: that failing to run this cleanup can cause an unintended reinstall on reboot, which goes beyond the structured annotation data.

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 compact sentence that front-loads the action and step context, then adds the critical warning. Every word earns its place, and it is easy to scan.

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 destructive cleanup tool, the description explains the mandatory timing and the risk of omission. There is no output schema, but the purpose, usage timing, and consequence are all covered. It could mention idempotency or what happens if the config does not exist, but this is not essential.

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%, so the parameters id, hostname, and confirm are already fully documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level semantics, which is acceptable given the schema carries the burden.

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 names a specific verb ('удалить') and resource ('PXE-конфиг'), and identifies it as Step 7 of a PXE reinstall flow. This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling create_pxe_config and other reinstall-related tools.

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 gives clear usage context: it must be run after the reinstall completes, with the consequence of skipping it explicitly stated (sudden reinstall on next reboot). It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the guidance is sufficient.

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