Delete service

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and the description adds important context: deletion is permanent, cannot be undone, and requires explicit confirmation. It clearly communicates the irreversible nature beyond the bare annotation flags.

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 two dense sentences with no filler. The usage condition is front-loaded, and the destructive warning is placed immediately after, making the critical information easy to process.

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 three parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential behavioral context: what is deleted, that it is permanent, and that confirmation is required. It could mention side effects or related resources, but the core information needed to invoke it safely is present.

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 only 33%, and the description does not explain the 'project' or 'service' parameters or their relationship. It adds some meaning by clarifying that a service is an app or addon and emphasizing confirmation, but it fails to fully compensate for the undocumented parameters.

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 uses a specific verb ('permanently delete') and resource ('Lizard service (app or addon)'), making the tool's function unambiguous. It also distinguishes this from sibling non-destructive operations like service_rename, service_scale, or deploy_restart.

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 'Use this when the user wants to permanently delete a Lizard service,' which gives clear conditions for invocation. It does not explicitly contrast with alternatives or mention when not to use it, but the destructive, confirmation-required framing is sufficient for typical selection.

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