Delete Serving

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint and idempotentHint, but the description adds substantial non-obvious context: the default is a non-mutating preview, the user must agree before confirming, and operation_id must be reused across retries or a new operation is created. This is exactly the kind of guidance annotations cannot 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 preview/confirm contract is front-loaded in the first two sentences, followed by operation_id rules and timeout recovery. Every sentence adds operational information; nothing is filler.

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, open-world write tool with an output schema (so return values need no explanation), the description covers the confirm gate, operation identity, and failure recovery — everything needed to invoke it safely.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must carry the load, and it thoroughly explains confirm (default false, preview semantics) and operation_id (UUID generation, reuse rules). The required 'serving' integer parameter is never explained — no hint that it is a serving ID — leaving a gap for one of three 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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Delete a serving and its endpoint.' An agent can immediately distinguish this from siblings like deploy_serving, scale_serving, pause_serving, and servings.

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?

Explicitly documents the two-step flow (confirm=false preview, then confirm=true), the operation_id requirement, and the timeout recovery path via operation_status. Names a concrete alternative behavior rather than leaving the agent to infer it.

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