delete_site

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

The description adds significant behavioral details beyond the destructiveHint annotation: the site URL becomes unreachable immediately, content cannot be recovered, and the confirm parameter must be true for the deletion to proceed. It also explains that omitting confirm returns an error.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the key purpose and a strong warning. Every sentence is informative and earns its place. No wasted 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?

Given no output schema, the description could mention what the response looks like on success or error. However, the behavioral information is well-covered. For a 3-parameter tool with low complexity, the description is mostly complete, lacking only a note about return values.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by explaining the confirm parameter's safety purpose and that partition can be omitted for the home partition. It reinforces the confirm:true requirement, which is critical for safe usage.

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 it permanently deletes a Hostsmith site and all deployed files, specifying the verb 'delete', the resource 'site', and the scope 'all deployed files'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create_site and get_site by being the only destructive deletion tool.

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 warns that this is destructive and should only be called after explicit user confirmation. It also explains the confirm parameter safeguard. However, it does not mention specific alternatives (e.g., what to use if only temporary removal is needed), though in the tool's context the only appropriate alternative is not using the tool.

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