deployment_delete

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Effectively discloses destructive side effects (cascade deletes instances and history) and lifecycle hook bypassing, giving the agent critical context about data loss risks and behavioral implications.

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?

Three tight sentences with zero waste. Front-loaded with core action, followed by specific behavioral flags. No tautology, no redundant phrases, every sentence earns its place.

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?

Explains cascade behavior well, but lacks output description (no output schema present) and doesn't clarify failure modes (e.g., behavior when attempting delete without cascade while instances exist), which is important for a destructive operation.

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?

Input schema is empty (0 properties), baseline 4. Description compensates significantly by documenting three critical boolean parameters (cascade, skipCustomListeners, skipIoMappings) and their semantic meanings, though the ID parameter's location (path vs query) is not specified.

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?

Clearly states the specific action (delete) and resource (deployment by ID). Mentions deployment-specific concepts (running instances, history) that help distinguish from similar sibling operations like processInstance_delete or processDefinition_deleteById.

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?

Provides implicit usage guidance through flag descriptions (cascade=true for instances/history, skip flags for hooks), but lacks explicit 'when to use vs alternatives' comparisons to siblings like deployment_redeploy.

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