pbs_node_disk_directory_delete

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

Discloses mutation risk, irreversible destruction of mapping, that disk data is never wiped, synchronous behavior, required PROXIMO_PBS_* config, and return format. No annotations provided, so description carries full burden and does so comprehensively.

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?

Concise yet dense with information. Structured with clear sections: MUTATION label, action, risk, comparison, synchronous behavior, confirm explanation, return value. Every sentence adds value 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 the presence of an output schema, the description fully covers tool purpose, side effects, safety, sync/async behavior, config needs, and return format. No gaps identified; complete for an AI agent to select and invoke correctly.

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%, but the description adds meaningful context beyond schema: explains confirm parameter's role (dry-run vs execution), mentions PROXIMO_PBS_* config requirement for proximo_target, and clarifies node default. Each parameter is addressed with additional behavioral context.

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 removes a directory datastore's mount unit and config mapping on a PBS node. It distinguishes from siblings like pbs_datastore_delete by noting that disk data is not wiped, and compares to PVE's equivalent to clarify 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?

Explicitly explains when to use (removing a datastore mapping), when not to use (not for disk cleanup), and contrasts with PVE's asynchronous version. Provides guidance on confirm parameter for dry-run vs execution.

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