impreza_uninstall_deployment

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

With no annotations, the description discloses key behavioral traits: it is idempotent and optionally destructive via `purge_data`. It does not mention prerequisites or error states, but given the tool's straightforward nature, this is sufficient.

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, front-loaded with the primary action and resource. Every sentence adds value—action, key parameter, idempotency—without redundancy or 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?

For a simple tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers all necessary information: purpose, required parameter, optional flag, idempotency. An agent has enough to invoke correctly.

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 the descriptions in the schema already explain both parameters. The tool description adds minimal extra context (e.g., 'catalog or custom' for deployment_id). It does not significantly enhance understanding beyond the schema, earning a baseline 3.

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 ('Uninstall a deployment (catalog or custom)') and the identifier ('by `deployment_id`'). It distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like redeploy or restart by focusing on removal. The idempotency note further clarifies behavior.

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 states when to use the tool (to uninstall deployments) and the optional `purge_data` flag. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives, but idempotency ensures safe repeated calls. It is clear enough for correct selection.

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