template_delete

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

The description goes beyond the destructiveHint annotation by detailing the consequences: it mentions permanence, loss of items/triggers/graphs on affected hosts, and that hosts themselves remain unchanged. This adds valuable behavioral nuance beyond the simple destructive flag.

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?

Two sentences with no filler. The primary action and permanent nature are front-loaded, and the side effect on hosts is explained concisely. Every sentence adds value.

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 simple one-parameter delete tool, the description covers the action, the permanence, and the impact on associated entities. With annotations already covering the destructive nature and an output schema present, nothing essential is missing for an agent to call this correctly.

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 schema fully describes the parameter (templateids as an array of string IDs to delete). The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate given 100% schema coverage.

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's purpose: deleting templates from Zabbix. It specifies the resource (templates) and the action (delete), and distinguishes it from sibling delete tools (item_delete, trigger_delete, etc.) by focusing on templates. The effect on hosts is also stated, making the scope explicit.

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 makes it clear when to use this tool: when you need to permanently remove templates. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the context is unambiguous given the name and sibling set. The description provides clear context without needing to state when not to use it.

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