Delete Scaleway IAM Policy

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

The description adds context beyond the annotations: it confirms the permanent nature, the immediate revocation of permissions, and the confirm requirement. This aligns with destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false without contradiction.

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?

Two short sentences, each earning its place. The first sentence front-loads the core purpose and permanence, the second adds critical usage details (confirm requirement and immediate effect). 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?

For a simple deletion tool with annotations and schema, the description covers the key behavioral aspects. It could mention side effects like what happens if the policy is in use (addressed implicitly by immediate revocation) or mention error conditions, but overall it is sufficiently complete for the tool's complexity.

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 confirm parameter already has a description in the schema that matches what the tool description restates. The policy_id parameter lacks any description in either the schema or tool description, so no new meaning is added for that parameter. The tool description does not compensate for the low coverage.

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 the specific verb 'delete' and explicitly identifies the resource as 'IAM Policy'. It clearly states the permanent nature and the immediate revocation of permissions, which distinguishes it from update, clone, or other policy-related sibling tools.

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 mentions the requirement for confirm=true and implies that this is for permanent deletion, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_policy or clone_policy. The guidance is adequate but lacks explicit 'when-not-to-use' or prerequisite checks.

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