Delete ISO/template

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false. The description adds 'Permanently delete' and the confirmation instruction, reinforcing the destructive nature and providing a safety step. No contradictions.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the action, no redundant words. Every sentence adds value.

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 destructive delete tool with annotations and no output schema, the description is mostly complete. It lacks explanation of the three required parameters (node, storage, filename) but the schema provides their names and some descriptions. Overall adequate.

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 description does not explain any parameters beyond the schema. Schema coverage is 50% (2 of 4 parameters have descriptions), and the description fails to add meaning for the undocumented parameters (node, storage). With low coverage, the description should compensate but does not.

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 'Permanently delete an ISO or template' uses a specific verb ('delete') and clearly identifies the resource type. It distinguishes this tool from siblings that delete VMs, containers, backups, snapshots, etc.

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 includes 'DESTRUCTIVE — ask the user to confirm before invoking', which provides explicit guidance on when to use (when user requests deletion) and the need for user confirmation. It does not compare to alternative tools for listing ISOs, but the guidance is clear enough.

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