Удалить сервер (НЕОБРАТИМО)

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It clearly discloses the irreversible destructive nature ('НЕОБРАТИМО', 'со всеми данными') and the confirmation requirement. The only minor issue is a discrepancy where confirm is optional in the schema but described as required.

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 dense sentence that front-loads the core action and includes essential conditions without any fluff.

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 delete operation with no output schema, the description covers the irreversible action, confirmation requirement, and name-matching safeguard. The inconsistency about confirm being required vs optional slightly undermines the otherwise complete picture.

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 coverage is 100%, providing a baseline of 3. The description adds important semantic constraints beyond the schema, such as confirm must literally be true and expected_name must exactly match the real server name.

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 states 'Удаление сервера со всеми данными' (deleting a server with all its data), a specific verb+resource, and reinforces it with the HTTP method/path. It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like delete_dns_record.

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 explicit prerequisites: confirm must be true and expected_name must match the real server name. It warns about irreversibility, making the destructive context clear, though it does not name alternative tools.

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