Delete a stack

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the raw API endpoint (DELETE /stacks/{id}); it does not say whether the underlying assets are deleted or merely unstacked, which is the key behavioral question for a destructive tool.

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?

Front-loaded and brief, with the core action stated first. There is minor redundancy between the title, the repeated 'Delete a stack', and the boilerplate API-operation line, but nothing is bloated.

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 single-parameter destructive operation with annotations carrying the safety hints, the definition is minimally adequate. It omits the consequence for stack members and any prerequisite/permission notes, which an agent would benefit from before invoking.

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 single id parameter is documented as a uuid in the schema, so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description's 'by its ID' adds only marginal confirmation beyond that.

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 stack') and adds the identifier scope ('by its ID'), which distinguishes it from a bulk delete. However, it never names or contrasts with the close sibling immich_delete_stacks, so the differentiation is only implied.

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 phrase 'a specific stack by its ID' implies single-stack usage versus bulk deletion, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance or routing to alternatives such as immich_delete_stacks or immich_remove_asset_from_stack.

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