pbs_namespace_delete

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly states it is a mutation, that it is dry-run by default, that delete_groups=True is destructive with no undo, that confirm=True is required for execution, and that it is synchronous. This provides ample transparency beyond the operation name.

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 extremely concise: a single sentence with critical warnings appended in bullet-like format. It is front-loaded with 'MUTATION: delete a namespace', making the purpose immediately clear. Every sentence adds necessary information without redundancy.

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 an output schema exists, the description does not need to explain return values. It covers the operation type, dry-run default, the risk of delete_groups, the confirm flag, and synchronous execution. It lacks explicit mention of prerequisites (e.g., namespace must exist) or error handling, but the core contextual elements are present.

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 only 20% (only proximo_target has a description). The description adds semantic value by explaining the roles of confirm (execute) and delete_groups (high risk, deletes all groups/snapshots). However, it does not detail the required parameters ns and store, leaving some missing semantics. The extra context partially compensates for the low coverage.

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 starts with 'MUTATION:' and states 'delete a namespace from a PBS datastore.' It specifies the verb (delete) and resource (namespace), and distinguishes from siblings like pbs_namespace_create and pbs_namespaces_list by focusing on deletion. The additional detail about dry-run and delete_groups further clarifies the scope.

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 provides clear guidance on how to use: a dry-run by default, with confirm=True to execute. It warns about delete_groups being high-risk and irreversible. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus its siblings, though it is implied by the action 'delete'.

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