opn_delete_firewall_category

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: savepoint protection on OPNsense < 26.7 with auto-revert, immediate changes on 26.7+, and the return dict structure. It also warns about potential lockout and advises checking opn_mcp_info for support and taking a config backup if needed.

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 several sentences long but each adds value, covering purpose, prerequisites, version nuances, backup advice, and return info. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and structured into logical paragraphs, though it could be slightly more succinct without losing essential details.

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, version-sensitive operation, the description covers all critical aspects: pre-deletion steps, version-specific behavior, backup strategy, and return format. It addresses the complexity of the tool and compensates for the lack of annotations and parameter descriptions thoroughly.

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?

The only parameter 'uuid' is described as 'by UUID' and the description points to the list tool for finding categories, adding guidance beyond the schema. However, it does not detail the expected format or constraints of the UUID, leaving some ambiguity for a single undocumented 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 clearly states the tool 'Delete a firewall rule category by UUID' with a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like add, list, and set categories. It also mentions savepoint protection, adding scope and context.

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?

Explicit guidance is provided: 'IMPORTANT: Reassign rules to other categories BEFORE deleting... Use opn_list_firewall_categories to find categories and opn_set_rule_categories to reassign rules first.' It also specifies that system defaults cannot be deleted and gives version-specific instructions, including a backup recommendation when savepoint support is absent.

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