pve_delete_snapshot

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly signals a destructive operation and adds a key behavioral requirement: 'Requires confirm=true', which is not obvious from the schema alone. It does not detail every consequence, such as permanence or dependency effects, but for a delete operation the core behavior is disclosed.

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 two short sentences with no filler. Both sentences add value: the first states the action/resource, the second gives a critical invocation requirement. It is appropriately front-loaded and every word 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?

The description is complete enough to identify the operation and the mandatory confirmation flag, but it lacks guidance on parameter values, alternatives, and edge cases. Since an output schema exists, return values do not need explanation, but the missing parameter semantics and usage conditions leave meaningful gaps for an AI agent.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the five undocumented parameters. It adds some meaning by clarifying that confirm must be true and hinting at VM/container types (and thus vm_type), but it does not explain node, vmid, snapname, or when to set vm_type to 'lxc'. The parameter guidance is inadequate given no schema descriptions.

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 specifies an action ('Delete') and a resource ('VM/container snapshot'), which fully distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_snapshot and rollback_snapshot. The verb and object leave no ambiguity about what the tool does.

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 description implies usage whenever a snapshot needs to be deleted, but it does not explicitly state when this tool should be preferred over alternatives or mention any exclusions. The only operational guideline provided is the confirmation requirement, which is useful but not a full usage context.

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