delete_monitor

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

The description discloses the destructive nature ('permanently removes') and cascading delete of changes/snapshots. However, it lacks details on authorization requirements or rate limits. Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the burden, and it partially meets it.

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?

The description is a single sentence that efficiently conveys the core action. However, it is too brief and misses an opportunity to briefly describe the parameter. Still, it is front-loaded and to the point.

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?

Given no annotations, no output schema, and a single undocumented parameter, the description is insufficient for an agent to fully understand how to invoke the tool correctly. It lacks context on how to obtain the monitor_id and what response to expect.

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 parameter 'monitor_id' has no description in the schema (0% coverage) and is not mentioned in the description. The description adds zero explanatory value beyond the schema structure.

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 ('permanently removes'), the resource ('monitor'), and the scope of deletion ('all its changes and snapshots'). This differentiates it from sibling tools like update_monitor or get_monitor.

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?

No usage guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool over alternatives like update_monitor or deactivate, nor does it mention prerequisites or irreversible consequences.

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