npm_delete_proxy_host

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, yet it says nothing about permanence, reversibility, cascade effects (e.g., attached certificates or dependent hosts), permission requirements, or whether confirmation is needed. 'Delete' conveys destructiveness only by connotation.

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 six-word sentence with the action and identifier front-loaded and zero filler. Nothing could be removed without losing information.

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 one-parameter delete with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient to invoke the tool correctly. However, with zero annotation coverage, the irreversible/destructive nature and permission context an agent should know before calling a delete are absent.

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% — host_id is fully documented in the schema as 'The ID of the proxy host to delete'. With a single well-described parameter, the baseline of 3 applies; the description's 'by ID' adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete a proxy host') plus the key ('by ID'), which cleanly separates it from sibling mutations on other resources (npm_delete_dead_host, npm_delete_stream, npm_delete_certificate, etc.) and from the non-destructive get/update/enable/disable variants. It does not explicitly name an alternative tool, so it falls just short of a 5.

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 beyond the obvious implication of the verb. Nothing states when deletion is appropriate versus disabling (npm_disable_proxy_host), nor any prerequisite such as ensuring the host is unused first. The agent must infer all of this from context.

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