pve_backup_job_delete

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavior: it's a mutation, dry-run by default, no undo primitive, synchronous execution on confirm, schedule removed but backups untouched. All behavioral traits are clearly stated.

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 with three distinct sentences: purpose, dry-run behavior, and explicit details. Every sentence adds information without redundancy, front-loading the key action and mutation flag.

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 output schema exists (context confirms), the description need not explain return values. It covers the mutation, dry-run flow, alternative for restore, and what happens to backups. Complements the input schema perfectly.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the confirm parameter as a gate for dry-run vs execution, and notes that no task UPID is returned. It also clarifies the overall flow, enhancing understanding beyond the schema 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 PVE cluster backup job, uses the verb 'delete', and distinguishes from related operations by noting that existing backups are NOT deleted. The mutation label and detailed behavior further clarify purpose.

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 explains the dry-run default and confirm gate, and suggests using pve_backup_job_create to restore a schedule. It provides context for when to delete but does not explicitly mention alternatives like pve_backup_job_update for modification, though it's implied.

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