Delete HA group

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, but description adds meaningful behavioral detail: resources revert to default group. It also reinforces the destructive nature. No contradiction with annotations.

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, front-loaded with the action, no filler words. Efficiently communicates purpose, side effect, and usage direction.

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 delete tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the key behavioral aspects (reverting resources), confirmation requirement, and purpose. Adequate for agent understanding.

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 has 2 parameters with 50% description coverage (confirm has description). Description adds context by mentioning user confirmation, which ties to the confirm parameter, but does not elaborate on the group parameter beyond what schema provides.

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?

Description clearly states 'Delete an HA group' (specific verb+resource) and mentions side effect 'Resources assigned to it revert to the default group'. Distinguishes from sibling tools like create_ha_group, update_ha_group, list_ha_groups.

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?

Explicitly says 'DESTRUCTIVE — ask the user to confirm before invoking', providing a clear guideline for when to use (after user confirmation) and when not to use (without confirmation). No alternatives mentioned, but the guideline is strong.

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