Location Delete

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds no behavioral context beyond those annotations: it does not mention permanence, permissions, side effects, or what happens if the location does not exist.

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?

One short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with zero wasted words. The identifier is included efficiently.

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 an output schema, rich annotations covering destructiveness and idempotency, and a fully described single parameter, the description is largely complete for correct invocation. It could mention that deletion is permanent or any prerequisites, but annotations already cover the critical safety profile.

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 description coverage is 100%, and the parameter schema already explains 'Location ID or name'. The description simply repeats that identifier information without adding syntax, format, or constraint details. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Delete', resource 'a location', scope 'from LibreNMS', and identifier 'by ID or name'. It clearly distinguishes from siblings like location_add, location_edit, and location_get without needing to open their schemas.

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 gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no alternatives, and no prerequisites. It merely states the deletion action, leaving the agent to infer context from the name and siblings.

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