kubectl_delete

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint: true, so the description's confirmation of deletion is not additive. The description does not disclose side effects like cascade deletion or irreversibility beyond the annotation, but it does not contradict the annotation either.

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?

A single concise sentence front-loads the verb and resource, and every word adds value. No fluff.

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?

With 10 parameters and no output schema, the description omits important context like return value, blocking behavior, or error conditions. For a destructive tool, more details on consequences would be helpful.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description lists the main deletion modes (by type, name, labels, manifest) corresponding to parameters, but does not clarify interactions or required combinations (e.g., name vs. labelSelector exclusivity).

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 deletes Kubernetes resources and specifies the methods: by resource type, name, labels, or manifest. This verb+resource construction is specific and distinguishes from siblings like kubectl_create or kubectl_apply.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, context for choosing between deletion methods, or when not to use it (e.g., preferring kubectl_apply for declarative management).

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