Удаление сетевого диска

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

The description discloses irreversible data loss, which is valuable. However, the annotations declare destructiveHint: false, which directly contradicts the description's claim that data will be lost. This is a serious inconsistency.

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 concise and well-structured: it states the action, warns of irreversibility, and gives a prerequisite in three short sentences. Each sentence adds value.

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-by-ID operation, the description covers the essential context: irreversibility and the need to unmount first. It lacks information about error handling if the drive is still mounted, but this is not critical.

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 covers 100% of the parameters with a detailed description of network_drive_id as a required UUID. The description adds nothing beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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'), the resource ('network drive'), and the method (by ID). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like mount/unmount or update.

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?

It explicitly states a prerequisite: the drive must be unmounted from all services before deletion, pointing to the unmount_network_drive tool. This gives clear guidance on when to use this tool versus first using another.

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