delete_lab

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

The description discloses that the operation is permanent and destructive, which is key behavioral context. Since no annotations are provided, this is valuable, but it omits permission requirements or any side effects beyond 'everything in it'.

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 two short sentences, concise and front-loaded with the key action and consequence.

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?

The tool is simple, but the description leaves unclear the distinction from 'wipe_lab' and whether any precautions are needed. The output schema exists, so return values are not the issue.

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?

The schema has only lab_id with no description, and the tool description does not mention the parameter at all. With 0% schema coverage, the description completely fails to explain how to specify the lab being deleted.

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 tool deletes a lab permanently, using a specific verb and resource. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'wipe_lab', so it doesn't fully meet the 5 criterion.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as stop_lab or wipe_lab. The irreversibility warning is not a usage guideline.

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