delete_zone_set

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full transparency burden. It discloses that deletion is immediate and irreversible, that monitors fall back to the default set (Halves), and that built-ins are refused. These are crucial behavioral traits for a destructive operation.

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 three concise sentences, each serving a distinct purpose: action+fallback, scope, and irreversibility+alternative. There is no fluff, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 simple one-parameter delete tool with no output schema, the description covers all necessary aspects: what it does, side effects, constraints, and when to use an alternative. It is complete enough for an agent to invoke correctly without ambiguity.

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 schema already covers the parameter (100% coverage) with 'Saved zone set name, as shown in get_state'. The description adds the critical constraint that only sets made with save_zone_set are valid, and that built-ins are excluded, going beyond the schema. It provides meaningful semantic enrichment.

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 tool deletes a saved zone set by name, specifies it only applies to user-saved sets (not built-ins), and distinguishes it from assign_zone_set. The verb 'delete' and resource 'zone set' are explicit, and the scope is well-defined.

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 clear guidance on when to use the tool (to delete a set) and when not to use it: 'use assign_zone_set instead when a monitor should merely stop using a set that others still need.' This explicit alternative makes the usage context highly actionable.

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