pbs_tape_backup_job_delete

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully covers behavioral traits: it confirms mutation, notes future automatic backups stop silently, media untouched, dry-run captures current config, confirm executes synchronously returning null, and no UNDO primitive. This is comprehensive.

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 dense but efficient, with each sentence adding critical info. It front-loads the purpose and risk. However, the all-caps labels and compact format might reduce readability. Still, it avoids verbosity.

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 and lack of annotations, the description is complete: it explains return format, prerequisites, side effects, and alternatives. The output schema exists and description matches it.

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%, providing baseline 3. The description adds value by explaining the confirm parameter's effect (dry-run vs execution) and the config requirement (PROXIMO_PBS_*). This goes beyond the schema's basic descriptions.

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 deletes a PBS tape backup job, using the verb 'delete' and resource 'tape backup job'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like pbs_tape_backup_job_create and pbs_tape_backup_job_update by specifying the action and risk.

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 explicit guidance: starts with 'MUTATION' to signal write operation, explains dry-run default and confirm flag for safe execution, warns of no UNDO, and explicitly recommends re-creation via pbs_tape_backup_job_create. It gives clear when-to-use and alternative.

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