Delete package version

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It signals a destructive mutation but never says whether deletion is permanent/irreversible, what permissions are required, whether the version must be untagged first, or what happens if the version is in use.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource, with the parenthetical example earning its place by clarifying the version argument. No filler.

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?

A destructive mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and only 60% parameter coverage. The description omits irreversibility, required permissions, and any error/edge-case behavior an agent would need before invoking it.

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 60% with two undocumented params (packageName, version). The description contributes only indirectly by clarifying that 'version' is a tag/digest, which slightly compensates but leaves the repository/packageName/location relationship and version format underspecified.

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 clear verb+resource pair ('Deletes one version of a package') and scopes it with an example ('an old Docker image tag/digest'), which separates it from ar_delete_repository and ar_list_versions. It is not explicitly contrasted with any sibling, but the operation is unambiguous.

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 phrase 'to free up storage' gives an implied rationale for use, but there is no statement of when this is appropriate versus alternatives, no prerequisites (e.g. does the version need to be untagged?), and no when-not guidance.

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