delete-runbook

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It merely restates the tool's name ('Delete a runbook') without revealing whether deletion is permanent, cascades to versions, or requires specific permissions. No additional behavioral context is provided.

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 very brief, but this brevity is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. It adds no value beyond the tool name and lacks any structured detail, making it an incomplete description rather than a well-crafted minimal one.

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?

The tool has a simple schema with one parameter and no output schema, but even for a simple delete operation, the description should mention the required identifier or any side effects. It does not, leaving gaps about what happens upon deletion (e.g., success confirmation, irreversibility).

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 0%, and the description does not mention the runbook_id parameter at all. With only one parameter and no explanation in either the schema or description, the agent receives no semantic guidance beyond the parameter name itself.

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 action (delete) and the resource (runbook), which is specific and distinguishes it from other runbook-related tools like delete-runbook-execution. However, it provides no additional context beyond the verb and object, so it does not fully differentiate itself from similar operations.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, conditions for deletion, or alternatives such as update-runbook or execute-runbook. There is no explicit context for appropriate usage.

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