iaas_delete_machine_disk

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and the description adds nothing beyond them — the route line merely repeats the annotation title. It does not say whether the disk is destroyed or just detached, whether backing storage is reclaimed, or what happens on a repeat call.

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?

Very short and front-loaded, with the operation stated in the first line. The third line duplicates the route already present in the annotations title, which is minor waste but not harmful.

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 destructive, open-world mutation the description covers only the bare identity of the operation. Annotations carry the safety profile, but the missing preconditions, data-loss implications, and any post-deletion state leave gaps an agent would want filled before invoking it.

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 100%, so both path parameters and the apiVersion parameter are fully documented in the schema. The description only echoes the {id} and {diskId} placeholders without adding format, sourcing, or constraints, 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Remove a disk from a given machine') and the exact route, so an agent can tell it apart from attach_machine_disk or get_machine_disk. It stops short of explicitly naming those siblings, but the operation itself is unambiguous.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus attaching, resizing, or promoting a disk, and no prerequisites such as whether the machine must be powered off or whether the disk must be detached first. The agent must infer all preconditions.

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