Delete a Scaleway IAM SSH Key

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

Annotations already mark destructiveHint=true and idempotentHint=false. The description goes beyond by emphasizing the permanent nature of the deletion and explaining the real-world consequence (loss of SSH access). It also highlights the confirm safeguard. This adds meaningful behavioral context that annotations alone do not convey.

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 (three sentences), front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence earns its place. No redundant or vague wording.

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 (2 params, no output schema, destructive), the description covers the permanent action, the confirmation gate, and the risk. It lacks guidance on retrieving the SSH key ID or handling errors, but for a delete tool with strong annotations, it is sufficiently complete.

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% (confirm has a description). The tool description only reiterates that confirm must be true, adding no new information about the ssh_key_id parameter (format, source, or required format). For a low-coverage schema, the description should compensate but does not sufficiently explain the 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 remove') and clearly identifies the resource ('an SSH key'), distinguishing it from other SSH key tools (list, get, create, update) and from other delete tools in the sibling list. The permanence and confirm requirement add operational clarity.

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 provides usage context by stating the confirm requirement and warning about the impact of deleting a key still in use. However, it does not explicitly compare to alternatives (e.g., updating the key or replacing it), leaving the agent to infer when this tool is the right choice over other SSH key operations.

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