delete_endpoint

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the cascade (captured requests are also removed) and two non-obvious side effects (a slot is freed; the request budget is not refunded). It stops short of stating irreversibility or permission/auth requirements explicitly, so not a 5.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and consequences. No filler, no repetition of the title or name.

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 one-required-param destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential consequences (endpoint plus requests removed, slot freed, budget not refunded). Only irreversibility/permissions are left implicit, a minor gap at this complexity level.

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 description coverage is 100% and the single slug parameter is documented in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no format or identifier-hygiene guidance for slug beyond what the schema already says.

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 (this agent's sandbox endpoint) and adds scope detail — the captured requests go too. Easily distinguished from create_endpoint, list_endpoints, and get_endpoint siblings by the operation named.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: 'Frees a slot' gives a reason to delete, but there is no explicit when-to-use, no prerequisites, and no pointer to alternatives (e.g. a tool that only clears requests without deleting the endpoint).

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