vercel_delete_env

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states 'Delete' which implies a destructive action, but fails to disclose any side effects (e.g., irreversibility, impact on deployments) or error conditions. Minimal behavioral context beyond the action verb.

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 very concise (one sentence, 18 words) and front-loaded with the action. However, it lacks structure (e.g., bullet points) and omits important details, making it slightly under-specified.

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 complexity (destructive action, 4 parameters, no output schema), the description is incomplete. It does not explain what happens after deletion, error handling, or how to obtain the other parameters. The agent lacks sufficient context for correct invocation.

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 description only mentions 'env id' from the four parameters. It does not explain the roles of project_id, team_id, or api_key. With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds little value beyond highlighting one 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 action (Delete), the resource (Vercel environment variable), and specifies how to get the required id from sibling tool vercel_get_env. It distinguishes itself from siblings by referencing the id retrieval.

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?

It provides implicit guidance by mentioning the prerequisite of getting ids from vercel_get_env, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool, when not to, or any alternatives. The context is clear enough for basic usage.

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