delete_variable_collection

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, and it does meaningful work: it discloses the cascading destructive effect ('and all its variables/modes') and the safety gate (confirmDelete=true). It stops short of stating irreversibility or permission requirements.

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 tight sentence (plus a short requirement clause) with the destructive scope front-loaded. Every clause earns its place and nothing is padded.

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 two-param tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the critical facts: cascade scope and the confirmation requirement. It would be complete with a note on irreversibility, but nothing essential to calling it correctly is missing.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains confirmDelete's meaning as a confirmation guard, but adds nothing about collectionId beyond what the name implies. One of two parameters is enriched, so partial compensation.

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 (variable collection), and clarifies the blast radius: the entire collection including all its variables and modes. This distinguishes it from the sibling delete_variable (single variable) and delete_variable_mode. Lacks an explicit sibling callout, so 4 rather than 5.

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 scope ('entire variable collection') implies when this tool is appropriate versus delete_variable/delete_variable_mode, but there is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The confirmDelete note is a usage precondition but is framed as a requirement rather than a routing rule.

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