pve_sdn_route_map_entry_delete

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: it is a mutation, performs a dry-run by default, executes with confirm=True, has no undo capability, and notes the undocumented behavior when deleting the last entry on a route-map id. Also includes a risk rating (RISK_MEDIUM).

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, comprising a few sentences that convey purpose, behavior, and risks. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly. No superfluous content.

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 (5 parameters, 2 required, output schema exists), the description covers essential aspects: mutation type, dry-run behavior, confirm flag, no undo, and undocumented edge case. The output schema exists, so return values do not need explanation. The description is complete for agent decision-making.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds context about the confirm parameter (dry-run vs execution) and mentions order as the entry position, but these are already covered in the schema descriptions. No additional semantic value beyond what the schema provides.

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?

Starts with 'MUTATION: delete a route-map entry (PENDING)' clearly stating the action and resource. The verb 'delete' and resource 'route-map entry' are specific and unambiguous. The description also distinguishes the tool by mentioning it is for deletion, differentiating it from sibling tools like pve_sdn_route_map_entry_create, get, and update.

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?

Explanation that dry-run is default and confirm=True executes the mutation provides clear usage guidance. Mentions that there is no config undo and re-creation is needed to revert, setting expectations. However, it does not explicitly compare to alternative tools or state when not to use this tool.

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