lucky_delete_port_forward

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

The annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds no behavioral context beyond restating that a delete occurs. It does not disclose consequences, such as forwarding being stopped permanently, or behavior when the key does not exist.

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 seven-word sentence with the verb front-loaded. Every word earns its place, and there is no redundant or filler content.

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-parameter deletion tool, the description is minimally adequate: the key identifies the resource, and annotations cover destructive and idempotent behavior. Still, it omits useful context like obtaining the key from lucky_list_port_forwards and any error or no-op behavior, so the description is not fully complete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the phrase 'by key' provides minimal semantic value by indicating that the key is the deletion selector. However, it does not explain where the key comes from, its expected format, or how it relates to list/create operations.

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 states a specific verb ('Delete'), a specific resource ('Lucky port forward'), and the selection mechanism ('by key'), making the purpose clear and distinguishing it from sibling delete tools like lucky_delete_stun_rule or lucky_delete_certificate.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as lucky_update_port_forward or lucky_list_port_forwards, nor are prerequisites mentioned, such as obtaining a valid key from a prior list call. Correct usage is left to inference from the tool name.

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