pbs_encryption_key_delete

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: it's a mutation, high risk, dry-run by default, synchronous execution, returns null response, and notes the potential for data loss. It also mentions the need for PROXIMO_PBS_* config.

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 front-loaded with 'MUTATION' and packs risk details, usage flow, and result format. While slightly verbose, every sentence adds value. A minor improvement could be trimming redundant phrases.

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 (mutation, high risk, no GET endpoint), the description covers all necessary context: risk assessment, verification steps, dry-run vs execution, synchronous behavior, return format, and configuration requirements. An output schema exists, so further return value explanation is unnecessary.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds context about the dry-run mechanism and the lack of a GET endpoint, but does not significantly augment the parameter meanings beyond what the schema already provides.

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 tool deletes a PBS client encryption key. It distinguishes from siblings like pbs_encryption_key_create, pbs_encryption_key_list, and pbs_encryption_key_toggle_archive.

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 warns of high risk and provides guidance: verify first with pbs_encryption_key_list, use dry-run (confirm=false) by default, and explains the execution path. It tells the agent when to use and what precautions to take.

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