Delete a placement group

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the important traits: the operation is destructive, free (no billing impact), and requires an explicit confirm flag. However, it omits material behavior such as what happens to servers still assigned to the group, whether the group must be empty, or whether the call is idempotent.

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 short sentences, zero waste, and the key operational fact (destructive + confirm requirement) is front-loaded right after the purpose.

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 2-parameter mutation with no output schema or annotations, the description covers purpose, cost, destructiveness, and the confirm requirement. It still leaves gaps about side effects on member servers and error behavior, which an agent running this destructive call would benefit from knowing.

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 but 'confirm' has no schema description. The phrase 'requires confirm true' compensates by telling the agent the flag must be set true to proceed, adding real meaning beyond the bare boolean type, though it doesn't explain the failure mode when confirm is false/absent.

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+resource ('Delete a placement group') that is immediately distinguishable from sibling cloud_create_placement_group, cloud_list_placement_groups, and the other cloud_delete_* tools that each name their own resource.

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?

No explicit when/when-not guidance or named alternatives, but the 'Free but destructive' note implies the cost/safety tradeoff an agent should weigh. Usage is largely self-evident from the verb, so guidance is implied rather than stated.

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