pve_sdn_zone_delete

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the mutation intent, dry-run default, and risk level (MEDIUM). However, it does not fully explain the role of the 'confirm' parameter or the output format, leaving some behavioral aspects unclear.

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 (three sentences) and front-loaded with 'MUTATION' and the primary action. Every sentence adds value, though the '(PENDING)' qualifier is slightly cryptic. Overall efficient.

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 has 4 parameters, no annotations, and an output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the output, the meaning of 'confirm' and 'lock_token', or how the dry-run plan is presented. The agent would need additional information to invoke the tool correctly.

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 description coverage is only 25% (only proximo_target has a description). The description adds minimal value: it implies 'zone' is the identifier but provides no format details. 'confirm' and 'lock_token' are not described at all, leaving the agent to infer their roles from the dry-run mention.

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 an SDN zone', which is a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes this from sibling tools like pve_sdn_zone_create, pve_sdn_zone_update, and pve_sdn_zones_list. The inclusion of '(PENDING)' may cause slight ambiguity but the overall purpose is clear.

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 mentions a precondition (PVE refuses if a vnet references the zone) and dry-run behavior, which provides some usage context. However, it does not explicitly guide when to use delete versus update or when-not to use it, and lacks alternative suggestions.

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