pve_storage_content_delete

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

No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool is a mutation, async with return of UPID or null, and highlights high risk for backup volumes. This is good transparency, though it could mention prerequisites or error conditions.

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 one sentence plus a short parenthetical, front-loading 'MUTATION' and including essential details (dry-run, risk, confirm, async) without any wasted words.

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 that an output schema exists, the description adequately covers the operation type, risk, confirm behavior, and async return. It does not detail all parameters or error scenarios, but it is sufficient for an agent to understand the tool's purpose and main behavioral traits.

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 low (20%), and description adds context for confirm (needed for actual deletion) and the types of volumes (ISO/template/backup). However, it does not explain volid, storage, node, or proximo_target beyond the schema. Some compensation but not comprehensive.

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 the verb 'delete' and resource 'content volume (ISO / template / backup) from storage', distinguishing it from sibling tools like pve_storage_content (list) or pve_storage_delete (delete storage itself).

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 provides crucial usage guidance: dry-run by default, high risk for backup volumes, and that confirm=True is needed to actually delete. It implies caution for mutation operations, though it does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives.

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