Delete a volume

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

With no annotations present, the description carries the full burden and does disclose meaningful traits: the operation is free of cost and destructive, and requires an explicit confirmation flag. It stops short of stating whether deletion is permanent/irreversible or what happens to attached volumes.

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 clauses, front-loaded with the action then the key constraints. Efficient, though slightly terse given the destructive nature of the operation.

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 annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essentials (cost, destructiveness, confirmation) but omits irreversibility, permission requirements, and the fate of dependent resources.

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, confirm is not), so the description must compensate. It does explain that confirm must be true, adding semantics beyond the bare boolean type, though the exact consequence of omitting it isn't spelled out.

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 volume') that maps cleanly to the tool name. It does not, however, distinguish itself from close siblings like cloud_detach_volume or cloud_list_volumes, so an agent must infer the boundary.

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 mentions the confirm=true requirement, which is practical usage information, but gives no explicit when-to-use vs detach/delete alternatives and no prerequisites or warnings about attached volumes.

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