cluster_delete

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

No annotations are present, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states the action but does not mention that deletion is destructive, irreversible, or requires specific permissions. Critical details for a delete operation are absent.

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?

The description is extremely concise (3 words) and front-loaded. While efficient, it could include a bit more context without losing brevity, such as indicating the parameter 'clustername' identifies the target.

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 action like cluster deletion, the description is overly minimal. It lacks information about irreversible consequences, cascading effects, or post-deletion state. An output schema is absent, so more context is needed.

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 100% with both parameters described. The description adds no value beyond the schema, so baseline score of 3 applies. It does not explain the 'options' object or provide additional context.

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 'Delete a cluster' clearly states the action and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like cluster_create or cluster_get. However, it could be improved by noting the permanence of the deletion.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as cluster_update or cluster_get. Missing context like prerequisites (e.g., cluster must exist, not in use) or when deletion is appropriate.

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