Dpanel Network Prune

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden, and it does flag the operation as destructive and gated by confirm=true. It does not clarify whether the action is reversible, what scope of networks is affected, or what permissions are required, so it is only partially sufficient for a destructive tool.

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, front-loaded sentence that conveys purpose, destructiveness, and the required parameter with zero padding. Nothing is wasted or buried.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. For a one-parameter prune tool the description covers the essentials (destructive, confirm-gated), though the lack of sibling differentiation and scope detail leaves a small gap.

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 0% with a single parameter, so the description must compensate, and it does by explaining that confirm must be set to true to proceed. It omits the default-false behavior, so it is not fully complete.

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 (清理/prune) and resource (未使用网络/unused networks), and the 'unused' qualifier implicitly separates it from dpanel_network_delete, which targets a specific network. It does not explicitly name the sibling, so it stops short of a 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 destructive nature and the confirm=true prerequisite are stated, which gives an agent a usable operational cue. However, it never says when to choose prune over dpanel_network_delete or what conditions make a network 'unused', leaving usage to inference.

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