Delete sandbox snapshot

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the bar is lower, yet the description still adds real value: the deletion is permanent/irreversible, and derived running sandboxes are not affected. The one remaining gap is failure behavior for an unknown snapshotId, which is not addressed.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the action and its permanence, then the blast radius, then the prerequisite. Zero 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?

For a 2-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers permanence, side effects, and the approval gate, which is most of what an agent needs. It could add what happens on a nonexistent or already-deleted ID, but that is a minor omission.

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 50%; the snapshotId description in the schema is already strong, but the 'confirm' parameter has no schema description at all, and the description implicitly gives it meaning by demanding user approval first — the agent can connect confirm=true to that requirement. It stops short of explicitly naming confirm, so not a 5.

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 specific verb ('Permanently delete') and a precisely scoped resource ('a saved sandbox snapshot'), and immediately clarifies that sandboxes already started from it are unaffected — which is exactly what separates this from sandbox_delete. An agent can distinguish it from sandbox_snapshot, sandbox_snapshot_list, and sandbox_delete without opening a schema.

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?

Provides one concrete gating instruction ('Get the user's approval first') and one scoping note (running sandboxes survive), which implies it is safe to use only for cleanup of unused snapshots. However, it never routes the agent explicitly — no 'use sandbox_snapshot_list to find the ID' or 'use sandbox_delete to remove the running sandbox instead'. Usage is inferred rather than stated.

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