npm_delete_access_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It says 'Delete' but never states that the operation is irreversible, whether it cascades to associated hosts/rules, whether it requires admin auth, or what the response looks like on success. For a destructive tool with zero annotation coverage this is a significant gap.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition. It is efficient, though the extreme brevity reflects missing information rather than deliberate concision.

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 with no annotations and no output schema, the description is too thin: it omits irreversibility, authorization requirements, and any failure modes. An agent has enough to identify the tool but not enough to invoke it responsibly.

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 description coverage is 100% and the sole parameter list_id is fully documented in the schema itself. The description adds no syntax, range, or format detail beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline 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 states a specific verb (Delete) and resource (access list) and pins the operation to an ID, so an agent can tell it apart from the sibling delete_* tools by resource type. It does not, however, explicitly differentiate itself from npm_list_access_lists, npm_get_access_list, or npm_update_access_list beyond naming the resource.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no note that this is the destructive counterpart to create/update access lists, and no indication of prerequisites (e.g. whether the list must be unreferenced before deletion). The agent must infer all of this from the name alone.

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