pve_pool_delete

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

Beyond being a mutation, it discloses dry-run default behavior, side effects (orphaned ACLs, members retained), precondition (pool must be empty), and execution trigger (confirm=True). Annotations are absent, so description carries full burden and does an excellent job.

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?

Three concise sentences: purpose, dry-run behavior with warnings, and execution flag. Each sentence adds essential information without redundancy. Front-loaded with 'MUTATION' and purpose.

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?

Covers core behavior, preconditions, and side effects. No mention of return values (output schema exists), permissions, or error handling. Given the presence of output schema and that the description is otherwise thorough, it is slightly incomplete but still strong.

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 description explains the confirm parameter's role in dry-run vs execution, adding value beyond the schema which only documents proximo_target. It does not detail poolid format, but the schema's 33% coverage is partially compensated. Overall, helpful context for key parameters.

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 'delete a resource pool', matching the tool name and sibling pool tools (create, get, list, update). It explicitly identifies the action and resource, distinguishing it from other pool operations.

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?

It provides specific usage guidance: dry-run with confirm=False to preview (PLAN warns of orphaned ACLs, requires empty pool, members not deleted), and confirm=True to execute. Preconditions are clear, but it does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives.

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