mempalace_delete_tunnel

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the deletion behavior is known. The description adds the 'tenant-scoped explicit' scope constraint, but does not disclose additional behavioral aspects such as permanence, cascading effects, or permission requirements. Given the annotations, this is acceptable but not enriched.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence containing exactly the essential action, scope, and identifier method. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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 delete operation with one parameter and an output schema, the description is nearly complete. It covers the action, scope, and target identification. Slightly more context about return values or error conditions could push it to 5, but annotations and output schema already fill most gaps.

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 input schema fully documents the single parameter tunnel_id with a clear description. The tool description adds no extra semantic detail beyond the schema, so with 100% schema coverage the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses the specific verb 'Delete' with the resource 'tenant-scoped explicit tunnel' and the identifier method 'by id'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_tunnel, list_tunnels, and follow_tunnels, and is far from tautological.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the qualifier 'tenant-scoped explicit' hints at a particular subtype of tunnel, it does not state a preferred context or mention any alternative (e.g., for implicit tunnels or other delete operations).

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