Delete Integration Package

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses destructive behavior (deletes package and artifacts), permission requirement (ALLOW_WRITE), and a mandatory confirmation flag (confirm=true). While it does not mention reversibility or dependent artifacts, it covers the key safety-critical traits.

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 one sentence that front-loads the action, scope, and prerequisites. Every word contributes value; there is no redundancy or padding.

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 delete tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: what it deletes, the scope (all artifacts), the permission needed, and the confirm flag. It lacks details on errors or irreversibility but is adequately complete for the given complexity.

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 has zero description coverage, so the description must compensate. It clarifies that confirm must be set to true, but does not elaborate on packageId beyond its name. The parameter semantics are only partially addressed, leaving some ambiguity about packageId format or the need to confirm for the operation to succeed.

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 states a specific verb (Delete) and resource (integration package) and clearly distinguishes from siblings by adding 'all its artifacts', making it the only destructive operation among get/list/create/copy tools. The purpose is unambiguous.

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?

It gives clear context for use: delete requires ALLOW_WRITE permission and confirm=true. It does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not conditions, but the deletion scope and prerequisites are clearly stated, which is more than minimal guidance.

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