workload_delete_run

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and 'Delete' is consistent with them, so there is no contradiction. But the description adds nothing beyond that: it does not say deletion is permanent, whether the run_id must reference an existing saved run, or what happens on failure.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It is appropriately sized for a one-parameter tool, though the brevity borders on under-specification rather than genuine economy.

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?

For a destructive, one-parameter operation with no output schema and no parameter documentation, the description leaves key questions unanswered: how to obtain run_id, whether the deletion is irreversible, and how it differs from sibling deletion tools. This is thin for a mutation tool.

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?

There is one parameter (run_id) with 0% schema description coverage, and the description says nothing about it. It does not explain the expected format or that the ID comes from workload_list, so the agent gets no help locating a valid value.

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?

States a specific verb (Delete) and resource (saved run), and the word 'saved' hints this targets a persisted run rather than an executing one. However, it does not distinguish itself from close siblings such as workload_delete or workload_run, leaving some ambiguity about which deletion surface applies.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no exclusion of alternatives, and no note on irreversibility or prerequisites. An agent must infer from the name alone that this is the right tool versus workload_delete or workload_stop.

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