Delete a solution

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and delivers the most consequential behavior: unmanaged deletes keep components in the environment while managed uninstalls remove them. It also flags the confirm:true requirement. It omits irreversibility and permission prerequisites, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

Two tight sentences, with the pac command and the core managed/unmanaged distinction front-loaded and the confirm prerequisite trailing. No wasted words, though it is slightly dense in the parenthetical clauses.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the critical behavioral distinction (container vs. uninstall) and the safety gate (confirm). It would be fully complete with a note on reversibility or required permissions.

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 all three parameters are already documented in the schema. The description restates the confirm requirement but adds no format or syntax detail beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 (delete) and resource (solution) and goes further by distinguishing the two deletion semantics: unmanaged container removal vs. managed uninstall. An agent can tell exactly what operation this performs without opening the schema.

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 clarifies the two modes and their effects, which helps an agent reason about consequences, but it never names alternatives or conditions for choosing this over siblings like cs_upgrade_solution or cs_list_solutions. Usage is implied rather than guided.

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