pmg_when_group_delete

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

Despite no annotations, the description discloses key behavioral traits: it labels the tool as 'MUTATION (MEDIUM)', explains the dry-run mechanism, warns that deletion cascades to all objects within the group, and provides the verified API path. This is substantial transparency for a potentially destructive operation.

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 concise, fitting key points into a few sentences. It front-loads the purpose and then adds details on dry-run, config requirement, API path, parameter guidance, and a warning. Every sentence adds value, though the structure could be slightly more streamlined.

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 that an output schema exists (as stated in context signals), the description need not explain return values. It covers the operation, parameters, prerequisites, dry-run behavior, and cascading deletion. It lacks detail on error conditions or side effects beyond the warning, but overall provides a solid understanding for the agent.

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?

With schema coverage at only 33% (proximo_target has a description), the description compensates well. It explains that ogroup is a numeric ID from pmg_when_groups_list and gives an example ('4'). It clarifies confirm's role by stating 'Dry-run by default. confirm=True to execute.' Proximo_target's description in the schema is sufficient, and the description adds no further for it.

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 action: 'delete a PMG RuleDB 'when' object group.' The verb 'delete' and specific resource 'PMG RuleDB when object group' unambiguously identify the tool's function. It distinguishes from siblings like pmg_when_group_create, pmg_when_group_update, etc., by focusing exclusively on deletion.

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 usage context: it emphasizes the dry-run default and the need to set confirm=True to execute, guiding safe usage. It also notes the prerequisite 'Needs PROXIMO_PMG_* config.' However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or compare it to alternatives, though the delete context is obvious.

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