pve_sdn_vnet_ip_delete

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: mutation nature, dry-run default, no GET endpoint, synchronous execution with no task UPID, risk of freeing active address, no digest support, and no undo. All beyond what would be covered by annotations.

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?

Extremely concise with no superfluous text. Uses formatting (bold, dashes) to front-load key information (purpose, risk, behavior) and groups details logically. Each sentence adds essential information.

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 all critical aspects: operation type, behavior (dry-run, confirm), risk, synchronicity, no undo, no digest, and provides a recovery path. Given the complexity, nothing is missing.

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%, but the description adds value by explaining the confirm parameter's role in dry-run vs. execution, the mac parameter for disambiguation, and the absence of digest support. This context enhances 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?

Clearly states the action ('delete an IP-to-MAC mapping from a vnet') and identifies it as a mutation. Distinguishes from sibling tools by referencing pve_sdn_vnet_ip_create for re-creation and implying no other similar delete tool exists.

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?

Explicitly describes dry-run default behavior, confirm parameter usage, risk level, and lack of undo. Provides alternative action (re-create with pve_sdn_vnet_ip_create) and implies when not to use (if a preview is needed, as no GET exists).

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