delete_signer

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the 7-day minimum window for AWS KMS deletion, the balance condition, and the refusal behavior. However, it does not mention permissions required, whether deletion can be reversed within the window, or the return value.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the core action and includes key constraints. No unnecessary words.

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 tool with no output schema, the description covers the main behavioral aspects: action, time window, and precondition. It could be improved by mentioning whether the deletion happens automatically after 7 days, but it is sufficiently complete for an AI agent to use correctly.

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%. The signer_id description in the schema repeats the tool description, adding little new value. The description does not provide additional per-parameter details beyond what is in the schema.

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 schedules the KMS key for a signer for deletion with a 7-day window, and mentions a precondition about balance. It matches the name 'delete_signer' and distinguishes from sibling 'drain_signer'.

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 explicitly says 'Refused if the signer has on-chain balance ≥ dust — drain first', which guides the agent to use the sibling 'drain_signer' tool before this one. It provides clear context for when to use and when not to use.

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