pbs_datastore_delete

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: mutation, dry-run default, conditional risk (destroy_data=False detaches config with chunks remaining, destroy_data=True permanently destroys data), async worker task returning 'submitted', and requirement for confirm=True. This is comprehensive and exceeds expectations.

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 well-structured with clear sections (MUTATION label, risk levels, async note, API path). It is slightly verbose but each part adds value. Front-loads the purpose and key risk information.

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 tool's complexity (conditional risk, async, multiple parameters), the description covers essential aspects: behavior, side effects, execution flow. Output schema exists but is not detailed in description; however, outcome='submitted' is mentioned. Could add more on return format but sufficient for safe usage.

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 low (20%), so description needed to compensate. It explains destroy_data (risk levels) and confirm (execution trigger) well, but does not clarify keep_job_configs or name. 'proximo_target' has a schema description, so partial compensation. Overall adds meaningful value but not fully comprehensive.

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 'delete a PBS datastore' and distinguishes between risk levels based on destroy_data, which differentiates it from sibling tools like create, get, list, or update. The verb and resource are explicit, and the conditional behavior is well-defined.

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 explains when to use (for deletion), dry-run default, and that confirm=True is needed to execute. It provides risk assessment (MEDIUM vs HIGH irreversible) which guides safe usage. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives like pbs_datastore_get to check status first, but the risk levels serve as implicit guidance.

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