misp_delete_object

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It clearly labels the action as 'Destructive' and explains the confirmation requirements (confirm:true for deletion, confirmHard:true for hard delete). This provides essential safety context.

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 extremely concise (two sentences) yet packs all essential information. The first sentence states the action, and the second provides the key constraints. No wasted 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?

Given the tool's simplicity and the absence of an output schema, the description covers the main behavioral aspects: deletion confirmation and hard delete. However, it does not mention return values, side effects (e.g., cascading deletions), or prerequisites (e.g., the event must exist). Minor gaps exist.

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 coverage is 100%, but the description adds crucial meaning: it explains that 'confirm' is required for any destructive deletion and that 'confirmHard' is an additional requirement for permanent deletion. It also mentions the MISP_ALLOW_DESTRUCTIVE environment variable, which overrides the confirm parameter.

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 specifies 'Delete a MISP object from an event', which is a specific verb+resource. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like misp_delete_attribute (deletes an attribute) and misp_delete_event (deletes an entire event).

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., misp_delete_attribute for attributes). It only provides implicit guidance through the name and the confirmation requirements. A clear comparison or exclusion would improve it.

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