delete_secret_environment_value

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Deletes' which implies mutation, but lacks details on destructiveness (e.g., whether the action is reversible, impact on other environments, or required permissions). The minimal description provides insufficient transparency.

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, concise sentence with no wasted words. However, it could be improved by adding brief context (e.g., scope of deletion) without becoming verbose.

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 the absence of annotations, output schema, and parameter descriptions, the description is too minimal. It does not explain what an 'environment-specific value' is, whether the deletion is safe to repeat, or what the tool returns. A simple delete tool still benefits from clarity on scope and side effects.

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?

Input schema has 100% missing descriptions (0% coverage), so the description must explain parameters. However, it only mentions 'environment-specific value of a secret' without defining secretSlug or environmentSlug. The parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory but no additional guidance (e.g., format, how to obtain them) is given, failing to compensate for the schema gap.

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 that the tool deletes an environment-specific value of a secret. It uses a specific verb and resource, and implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like delete_secret (which deletes the entire secret) and delete_variable_environment_value (which targets variables instead of secrets).

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 delete_secret or delete_variable_environment_value. The description does not specify prerequisites or conditions for use, leaving the agent to infer from context.

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