delete_container_firewall_rule

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

Annotations are absent, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Delete', implying a mutation, but does not disclose that the operation is permanent, whether it requires the rule to exist, or any permissions needed. This is a significant gap for a destructive operation.

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 a single, efficient sentence with no wasted words. However, it is very close to the tool name and provides little additional structure or context, so it earns a 4 rather than a 5.

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 a destructive deletion with no annotations, no output schema, and a minimal description. It lacks information about effects, error conditions, or how to use it in workflow. The schema provides parameter details, but overall the description is under-specified for a mutation operation.

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 fully describes all three parameters (node, vmid, ruleid) with clear descriptions, covering 100% of parameter semantics. The description itself adds no parameter-specific meaning, but the schema does, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description clearly states the action (Delete) and resource (firewall rule for a container), distinguishing it from sibling tools like delete_vm_firewall_rule and create_container_firewall_rule. It's specific enough, though it doesn't mention the rule identifier or that it's a destructive removal.

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 about when to use this tool or how it differs from alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, or that this tool should be used instead of list_container_firewall_rules to identify the ruleid. The description only states the core function without context.

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