Delete an environment

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the irreversible nature, the requirement for confirm, and that it runs 'pac admin delete' with the active profile. This is strong behavioral disclosure for a destructive operation. It doesn't mention backup retention details beyond 'platform's own backup retention', which is a minor gap.

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 three sentences, each earning its place: the first defines the scope, the second emphasizes irreversibility and confirm, the third ties it to the underlying command. It is front-loaded with the most critical info about destructiveness and confirm flag.

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?

Given the destructive nature and no output schema, the description provides enough for an agent to understand the critical requirements: confirm is mandatory, irreversible, and runs pac admin delete. It could mention the output or potential errors, but the complexity is moderate and the key safety aspects are covered.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all parameters are documented in the schema. The description adds the crucial meaning of confirm (dry run without it) but doesn't elaborate on other parameters like cwd, async, profile, or timeout. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema covers the basics.

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 it deletes an environment with all its contents, and the verb 'delete' is specific and unambiguous. It distinguishes from sibling tools like cs_admin_reset_environment by emphasizing irreversibility and full deletion.

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 clearly states that it mutates a live environment and requires confirm: true, implying this is for when deletion is intended. It does not explicitly list alternatives or when not to use it, but the irreversibility warning and the contrast with reset tools gives clear context. Sibling tools like reset or backup are not named, but the destructive nature is emphasized.

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