Delete a network

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does add real context: the operation is flagged as destructive, free of cost, and gated behind a confirm flag. It stops short of disclosing what happens to attached members, whether the action is reversible, or what permissions are required.

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?

Three short clauses with zero filler, and the identity of the operation is front-loaded ahead of the cost, destructiveness, and confirmation details. Nothing needs to be trimmed.

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 tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essential safety signal and the confirm gate, which is roughly minimum viable. It omits the downstream effects on network members and the irreversibility of deletion, which an agent would need before calling it.

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 coverage is only 50% – 'id' is documented in the schema, but 'confirm' has no schema description. The description compensates by stating that confirm must be true, giving the otherwise undocumented parameter meaning and a required value.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Delete a private network'), which cleanly separates it from the many sibling delete tools for volumes, servers, firewalls, and load balancers. An agent can identify the operation without opening the schema.

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 states a precondition ('requires confirm true') but never says when to use this versus alternatives, nor what conditions should precede deletion. No exclusions or routing guidance to siblings are given, leaving usage to inference from the name.

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