s3_delete_bucket

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

Annotations already include destructiveHint=true, but the description adds specific impact by warning that all files in the bucket will be deleted. This goes beyond the bare hint and makes the consequence concrete. It is consistent with the annotations and provides useful context beyond what the structured data declares.

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 a clear action verb and a bolded destructive warning. There is no fluff or irrelevant detail. The parenthetical tool name is marginally redundant but does not detract from the concise structure.

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 straightforward destructive delete, the description plus schema and annotations cover the essential aspects: what is deleted (bucket and its files), the confirm requirement, and account_id resolution. Missing information includes the return value/response format and whether prerequisites like bucket existence are checked, but these are minor for invoking the tool 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%: bucket is described as the bucket name, confirm states that true is required to execute, and account_id explains it is the S3 account ID and directs to s3_get_users. The tool description itself adds no further parameter information, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 states the action directly with the verb 'Удалить' (delete) and the specific resource 'бакет из S3-аккаунта' (bucket from S3 account). Although it repeats the tool name parenthetically, the target is unambiguous. The resource type 'bucket' distinguishes it from siblings like s3_delete_file and s3_delete_account.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus s3_create_bucket, s3_delete_file, or s3_delete_account. No prerequisites, selection criteria, or alternative conditions are mentioned. The description simply states the operation, leaving the agent to infer context.

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