Удаление группы нод

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

The description states 'Все ноды группы будут удалены' (all nodes of the group will be deleted), which clearly indicates destructive behavior. However, the annotation destructiveHint is false, contradicting the description. This is a direct annotation contradiction, resulting in the lowest score.

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 consists of two short sentences that immediately state the action and its consequence. There is no unnecessary fluff, and the structure front-loads the primary purpose, making it highly efficient.

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 simple delete operation with only two parameters, the description sufficiently covers the main effect (deleting the group and its nodes). It does not mention reversibility or permissions, but given the low complexity and lack of an output schema, the description is largely complete. The annotation contradiction slightly detracts from overall completeness, but the description itself provides the key context.

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?

The schema has full coverage (100%) of the two parameters, both with descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The tool description does not add any parameter-specific meaning beyond the schema, so it neither improves nor detracts from the schema's clarity.

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 uses a specific verb 'Удаляет' (deletes) and identifies the resource as 'группу нод из кластера' (node group from cluster). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_k8s_cluster_node (deletes a single node) and delete_k8s_cluster (deletes the entire cluster).

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 implies it is used when you want to delete an entire node group, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives such as delete_k8s_cluster_node. No exclusions or alternative guidance is provided, so usage is implied rather than explicitly stated.

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