Delete SDN controller

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds that associated zones/vnets will stop working, which is important behavioral context. It also reinforces the need for confirmation. 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 sentences with no wasted words. Front-loaded with the action and resource. 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 two parameters and no output schema, the description provides necessary context: consequences and confirmation requirement. It could add detail about the 'name' parameter but is generally complete.

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 50% (only 'confirm' has description). The tool description does not add any parameter semantics beyond the schema. It mentions confirmation but doesn't explain the 'name' parameter. Baseline is 3 due to partial coverage, and description doesn't compensate.

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 clearly states the action ('Delete') and the resource ('SDN controller'). It distinguishes from siblings like create_sdn_controller or update_sdn_controller. The warning about destructive effects further clarifies its purpose.

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 explicitly instructs to ask for user confirmation before invoking, which is a clear usage guideline. It doesn't explicitly say when not to use, but the destructive nature and the confirm parameter imply that. It could mention alternative non-destructive actions, but it's sufficient.

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